Text
The judgment below
The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
The defendant shall be 40 hours.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to Article 3 of the facts charged by misapprehending the legal principles, the date and time of the crime in this part of the facts charged is indicated as "B around 2011." As the above facts charged do not specify the date and time of the crime, and thus, it is impossible or considerably difficult to exercise the defendant's right to defense, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of this part
B. In the process of misunderstanding the fact that the defendant might have had a easy physical contact in the process of taking the victim into consideration, but there was no indecent act or rape against the victim.
In particular, in relation to the facts charged, there was a difference between the victim and the victim’s mother F’s statement in relation to paragraph 1, an excessive detailed statement made by the victim about rape in relation to paragraph 2, a description of the depth at the time of rape, and a particular wife after rape.
In light of the fact that the victim's statement on the facts charged or stated that he did not have any credibility, the judgment of the court below that the defendant committed each crime based on the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
C. The lower court’s sentence (7 years of imprisonment, 10 years of information disclosure and notification) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires the determination of legal principles as to the assertion of legal principles, is to facilitate the exercise of the defense right by specifying the scope of the defendant's defense. Thus, the facts charged are sufficient if it is stated to the extent that the specific facts constituting the elements of crime can be distinguishable from other facts by comprehensively taking into account the specific elements, and the "date" of crime as stated in the above legal provision is sufficient to the extent that it does not conflict with double prosecution or prescription.