2019 high-20 Indecent acts by force of soldiers, etc., assault of soldiers on duty, intimidation of soldiers on duty, etc.

(Revocation of Prosecution), assault, insult (Partial Revocation of Prosecution)

A

Ranks

No.

its affiliation

Residence

Reference domicile

So-called So-called So-called Mana (Court of First Instance), So-called Mana (Court of Second Instance), Captain Kim Written (Court of Second Instance)

August 26, 2019

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of indecent act by the military personnel is acquitted.

Criminal facts

1. Violence committed by a soldier in the line of duty, etc. against K (tentative name, female, 18 years old);

On November 21, 2018, the Defendant assaulted the said victim, who was a soldier performing duties two times in total, as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 2, from October 21, 2018 to November 21, 2018, using the guns (weights: approximately 1kg) of electricless cables for vehicles located at 00:00 p.m. to 00 p.m., the Defendant used the guns (weights) of non-electric cables for vehicles.

2. As to the victim P

(a) Military personnel on duty, violence;

From October 1, 2018, at around 13:00, the Defendant assaulted the victim, who is a soldier on duty, at the location described in paragraph 1.(1) to 2-3 of the paper A4, at the price of the back-up of the victim P, who is a soldier in the process of performing duties, in preparation for communications school education directed by the chief of the terminal.

(b) Violence;

On November 28, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 19:00, around 00:00, M, located in M, located in 000, at a restaurant, sold the Defendant’s drinking and left-hand lub part of the victim’s middle part of the victim’s drinking and left-hand lubing part, one time each, and two times in total.

(c) Contempt;

피고인은 2018. 10. ~ 11. 일자불상 19:00경 제1.항 기재 장소에서 K(가명)가 보는 앞에서 피해자에게 “행보관이 일하고 있는데 하사 새끼가 뭘 지금 퇴근을 하냐? 하사새끼가 행보관이 이야기하는데 웃네, 미쳤네”라고 말하여 공연히 피해자를 모욕하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the military prosecutor's office of K and P;

1. Unelectric cable photographs for vehicles;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 60(1)2 of the Military Criminal Act (a point of violence such as a soldier performing his duties), Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (a point of violence), Article 311 of the Criminal Act (a point of insult), the selection of each fine

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the severe penalty and penalty) (the aggravation of concurrent crimes committed by a person on duty, etc. against Kim U.S. on November 21, 2018), Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Invitation of a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

Grounds for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of 50,000 to 15 million won; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria shall not apply as the fine has been selected.

3. Determination of sentence: It is consistent with the text of the order; and

Although the form of the act of the instant crime is minor, the Defendant appears to have committed assault and verbal abuse against the victims who are subordinate officers, and the Defendant appears to have been working in the military unit as an appointed noncommissioned Officer, taking advantage of his status as an appointed person rather than an exemplary form, and impeding the work environment in the military unit, such as destroying personal maternity to the victims, and the victims still desire to punish the victims. However, the Defendant is selected as a fine in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and consequence leading up to the Defendant’s crime, the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, and the sentence shall be determined as ordered.

Parts of innocence

Of the facts charged in the instant case, as to indecent acts by force such as soldiers:

1. Summary of the facts charged

At around 09:00 on November 15, 2018, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim on five occasions in total, as shown in attached Table 1, on the following day from October 2018 to December 2018, 2018: (a) around 09:00 to 00 :00 ; (b) on the part of the Defendant, he/she set up one string of the Victim Staff K (the 18-year old-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-of-the-job-age-age-age

2. Determination

A. Relevant legal principles

“Indecent act” means an act that causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to good sexual morality, and thus, it constitutes an infringement on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it constitutes such an act ought to be determined carefully by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship before the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to such act, specific manner of act, and the objective situation surrounding the act, and the sexual morality of the era (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Do2506, Jan. 23, 1998; 2002Do2860, Aug. 23, 2002).

Meanwhile, even if the act of assault itself includes a so-called indecent act by indecent act which is deemed an indecent act by indecent act by indecent act, insofar as the elements of the crime of indecent act by indecent act are stipulated as “a person who commits an indecent act against another person by assault or intimidation,” such act constitutes an act that can be seen as the exercise of force against the other party. Such act itself aims at the sexual humiliation, stimulation, or satisfaction of the other party’s sexual self-determination, and has a symbol that can be seen as having the healthy general public feel a sense of sexual humiliation or hate, so it shall be deemed that the act of assault and indecent act at the same time be evaluated as realizing the victim’s sexual humiliation at the same time, and even if it does not require subjective intent to meet the sexual humiliation, it shall be deemed that the act of assault and indecent act is at least an act that may cause sexual humiliation or aversion from the general perspective, and criminal liability of indecent act by indecent act is established in the area of 281,000 square meters (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016

B. Whether the defendant's act constitutes an indecent act

군인 등강제추행의 점에 관한 공소사실은 피고인이 피해자 김미자의 팔뚝 안쪽살을 꼬집어 잡아당기거나 귀를 잡아당겼다는 것인데, 위 관련 법리와 기록에 나타난 사정을 종합하여 보건대 피고인의 이 사건 행위는 다음과 같은 이유로 법적으로 처벌되는 강제추행이라고 볼 수 없다. ① 피고인은 피해자의 팔뚝 살을 꼬집어 잡아당긴 행위와 귀를 잡아당긴 행위에 대하여 질책 또는 훈계의 목적에서 비롯된 것이라고 주장한다. 한편 피해자는, 2018. 11. 15.경 피고인으로부터 팔뚝을 꼬집힌 것(공소장 별지1 범죄일람표 순번 2번)에 대하여, 군사경 단계에서 진술서를 작성할 때는 “용사 전역식을 진행한 후 흩어지는 도중 원사 김경식 자신이 원하지 않는 말을 하자 왼쪽 안쪽 팔뚝살을 꼬집었습니다”라고 진술하였고, 군사경에서 조사를 받으면서는 “연병장에서 용사전역식을 하고 있었는데 제 왼쪽 안쪽 팔뚝 살을 손으로 꼬집으면서 들어가자고 했습니다”라고 진술하였고2), “진술인 생각에 행정보급관이 왜 그런 행동을 했다고 생각되어 지나요”라는 조사자의 물음에는 “그냥... 행보관님이 제가 사진을 더 찍겠다라고 얘기한 것에 대해 부정의 의미로 제 팔뚝 살을 장난으로 꼬집은 것 같습니다”라고 진술하였다. 2018.11. 초 ~ 중순경 피고인이 귀를 잡아당긴 것(공소장 별지1 범죄일람표 순번 4번과 관련하여서는, “제가 행정반에 있는 의자 옆에 서 있었는데, 무슨 업무를 지시했는데 정확한 대화내용은 기억이 나지 않습니다. 그 때 행보관님이 얘기한 것에 대해 제가 동의를 안 하니까 제 오른쪽 귀를 손으로 잡아당겼고 저는 그때 잡아당긴 귀가너무 아파서 아픕니다 라고 말했더니 행보관님은 웃으면서 그냥 업무적인 얘기를 이어 갔습니다”라고 진술하였다. 이러한 피해자의 진술에 비추어보면 피고인의 주장에 수긍이 가고, 피해자 또한 피고인이 추행의 의도를 가지고 위와 같은 행위들을 하였다고는 생각하지 않았다고 보인다. ② 위 두 개의 행위는 모두 업무와 관련한 대화중에 있었던 일이고, 행정반 또는 연병장이라는 공개된 장소에서 발생한 점, 귀 및 팔뚝 안쪽살은 상대방의 허락 없이 만질 수 있는 부분은 아니더라도 성적으로 민감한 부분은 아닌 점, 당시 피해자는 전투복을 입고 있었는데 (2018. 11, 15.경 연병장에서는 전투복 위에 야전상의를 입고 있었음) 피고인은 옷 위로 피해자의 팔뚝을 꼬집었다가 바로 놓았고, 귀를 만진 행위는 주무르는 것이 아니라 3초 이내로 짧은 시간에 잡아당겼다가 놓은 것인 점 등을 고려할 때 피고인의 행위는 불쾌감을 주는 성희롱 또는 폭행에 해당할 수는 있지만, 피고인이 피해자에게 성적 수치심이나 혐오감을 야기하는 행위를 한다는 인식이 있었다거나 일반적인 입장에서 보더라도 성욕의 자극이나 만족을 구하려는 행태로 볼 만한 사정이 드러난 경우라고 볼 수 없다. ③ 피해자는 앞서 언급한 두건 외에는 군사경에서부터 군검찰 조사에 이르기까지 다른 피해사실(공소장 별지1 범죄일람표 순번 1번, 3번, 5번)에 대해 전혀 진술한 바 없고, 다만 군검찰에서 조사를 받을 때 팔뚝을 여러 차례 꼬집혀서 장소나 상황 같은 것들이 기억이 나지 않는다는 취지로 세 차례 언급하였을 뿐3), 구체적으로 당시 상황이 어떠했는지에 대해 조사가 되지 않았고 확인되지도 않는다. ④ 공소장 기재 자체로 보아도 피고인에게 강제추행의 고의가 있었다는 점, 폭행·협박이 있었다거나 기습적으로 추행하였다는 점이 드러나 있지 않다.

(c) the partnership;

Ultimately, the evidence submitted by the military prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact of indecent act by force of military personnel, etc., and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Thus, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 380 of the Military Court

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

A person shall be appointed.

1) Although the facts charged in the indictment are stated in the middle order of 2018, the ex officio correction is made in the order of October 2018 on the evidence records (referring to the first military prosecutor's protocol against P, the first military prosecutor's protocol, and the military prosecutor's protocol against P).

2) There is a difference between the statements made in the military police investigation by the victim and the statement made in the military police investigation by the statement that he/she had the word “Is” while undergoing an investigation by the military prosecutor

3) The facts of damage set forth in Appendix 1, Nos. 1, 3, and 5 of the indictment appear to be based on the witness’s statement in P, D, and C. Even if there were such facts, it shall not be deemed an indecent act for the foregoing reasons.