(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.6.30. 선고 2020노553 판결

The defendant's appeal as to the guilty portion of the judgment below and the prosecutor's appeal as to the remainder of the acquittal portion of the judgment below are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of rape and bodily injury included in the charges of rape injury, and ② detention. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of not guilty of intimidation, assault, and special intimidation. ③ The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the injury resulting from rape (not guilty of the grounds for appeal). The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor is as follows.

A. Defendant

1) ① The Defendant did not rape the victim at a hotel while getting out of the hotel. The victim’s statement that corresponds to this part of the facts charged is difficult to believe. ② At the time of sexual intercourse, the Defendant did not exercise the force to make it impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim, and there is also no proximate causal relation between the Defendant’s assault, intimidation, and sexual relationship. ③ Confinement is accompanied by the process of assault, and it is difficult to view that the Defendant detained the victim, separate from the assault.

In the part of the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise, there is an error of mistake of facts regarding rape and confinement.1)

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

(b) Prosecutors;

1) ① A victim’s statement that conforms to the crime of intimidation, assault, or special intimidation may be trusted. ② In light of the background leading up to the Defendant’s assault and rape, the degree and time of assault, and the father and degree of the victim’s injury, etc., the Defendant should be deemed to have inflicted an injury on the opportunity to rape the victim (the point of injury by rape).

The portion of the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise is not guilty (including the portion not guilty) is erroneous in mistake of facts.

2) The lower court’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts (Rape and confinement)

The victim’s statement is not sufficient to prove that he/she is guilty of this part of the facts charged. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, stating that “The victim’s statement may be trusted on the grounds of various circumstances.”

In light of the overall circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the original judgment and the trial court, the judgment of the original court is justifiable, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit. The addition or supplementation of the grounds is as follows.

(a) The fact that the victim is able to believe the statement;

In the following respects, the victim’s statement may be trusted. The evidence submitted in the trial alone cannot reverse the “determination by the court of original judgment based on the conviction that was obtained by directly observing the victim’s statement form, attitude, penology, etc. in the open court (see Supreme Court Decision 2018Do17748, Jul. 24, 2019).

1) The fact that consistency and accuracy of the statement can be recognized

A) The victim consistently stated from the investigative agency to the court below’s decision, the circumstances leading up to the victim’s c hotel from the hotel room, the circumstance in which the defendant left the victim’s cell phone and the key of the vehicle was concealed, the circumstance and degree of assaulting the victim, the circumstances in which the defendant made the victim write down the body organs that the victim saw, and the situation at the time when the defendant raped the victim, etc. are very concrete.

B) From the time when the victim first made the statement to the investigative agency, the victim made a proposal to the Defendant to go to the C hotel, and then paid hotel expenses to the Defendant, and the victim made a voluntary statement to the effect that he/she was disadvantageous to him/her to him/her, such as “the fact that the victim attempted to take a water surface guidance system for the Defendant,” etc. In addition, at the time of sexual intercourse, the victim made a statement to the effect that he/she was somewhat favorable to the Defendant. If the victim was willing to dismiss the Defendant, the victim made a statement to the effect that he/she did not make

(2) The circumstances immediately before committing rape

In light of the following circumstances, the victim's statement that the defendant, immediately before the crime of rape, was committed by confinement and rape in the written test of the defendant, can be believed.

A) The Defendant, immediately before committing rape, exercised the following tangible force against the victim, or committed a harsh act.

(1) For a considerable period of time, the Defendant: (a) taken the victim’s face, head, etc. in a state of her body’s body by drinking; (b) sold the victim’s eye, buckbucks, and kne kne kneel by drinking water with water; and (c) took the victim’s side knekel and knekel kneel. The victim suffered not only the victim was sleep in the telegraph but also the victim was suffering from 35 days of medical treatment due to the act of assault by the Defendant at 5, 6, and 7.

① In light of the following facts: (a) the victim brought an appeal to the left-hand chest continuously from the time of the commission of this part of the crime; (b) the victim brought an appeal to the injury taken after the commission of this part of the crime; (c) the victim suffered an assault over a considerable time; and (v) the victim stated in the lower court’s court that “the victim stated that “the side of the chest and the side side of the chest was to the extent that the victim would not have any reasonable concealment; e.g., the degree of physical suffering that the victim was suffering from rape before the commission of the crime.”

(2) immediately after the crime of assault and rape, immediately before the crime of rape, the Defendant made the victim write a camera to confirm the fact. The purpose of this is to recognize that “the victim caused monetary damage to the Defendant by conspiracy with the Defendant,” and that “the victim was in a relationship with the Defendant.”

① Even based on the contents of the camera, the victim cannot be deemed to have voluntarily drawn up. ② In light of the fact that the Defendant immediately before drawing up the camera was assaulting the victim due to a considerable intensity, ③ the victim was able to easily understand the Defendant even before drawing up the camera, and the victim appears to have been able to have been inevitably drawn up by the Defendant’s strong pressure, it appears that the Defendant had been subject to psychological pressure to a considerable extent in the course of drawing up the camera, and during that process, it appears that the victim was satisfyed that the victim was satisfying.

B) In light of the following circumstances related to the Defendant’s exercise of force or harsh conduct, the victim’s statement may be trusted.

(1) As seen thereafter, the Defendant does not seem to have intentionally assaulted the victim of rape from the beginning. It is difficult to view such assault as the commencement of the commission of rape.

① However, due to the Defendant’s assault and cruel acts, the victim seems to have complained of considerable physical pain; ② due to the Defendant’s assault and insulting behavior, the victim’s bodily body appears to have suffered a considerable amount of humiliation or emotional deprivation; ③ The Defendant’s assault and cruel acts are the same place where the victim was committed as a female; and ③ the interval between time is difficult to be deemed to have been considerably high. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s assault and cruel acts was committed, it does not appear that the Defendant pressured the victim on the grounds that he did not have been understood as being sexually by assault and cruel acts, and that it does not appear that the Defendant and the victim did not have sexual intercourse with the Defendant who was sexual intercourse with the Defendant on the grounds that he did not have been understood as being sexually by assault and cruel acts. There is no opportunity or circumstance that the Defendant and the victim were able to have ever settled.

(2) Rather, the victim’s statement that “the defendant, although the defendant demanded a sexual demand, has rejected it too much, placed the defendant (the victim) on the bed and inserted his sexual organ on the bed, and the defendant could not actively refuse it. However, the victim’s statement that “the appropriate part is too humiliated and continued to be so humiliated.” is consistent with the rule of experience.

3) The circumstances immediately after this part of the crime

The victim’s statement may be trusted even when the victim’s act was considered immediately after the crime in this part.

A) On May 24, 2019, immediately after the crime of this part was committed, the victim left a hotel (Macheon City) with the Defendant on May 24, 2019, and arrived at the victim’s residence (Seoul AH located). The victim made a dance to the Defendant that only “the Defendant will come to an address,” and then requested I to file 12 reports. The time when I reported the damage to 112 was "01:08 on May 25, 2019," and 9) the time when the victim arrived at the police station in order to prepare a written statement was "01:15 on May 25, 2019."

① 위와 같이 피해자가 이 부분 범행 직후 경찰에 피해 사실을 알렸던 점, ② 피해자가 C호텔을 나온 직후 주도면밀하게 허위 사실을 꾸몄다고 보기에는 이 부분 범행 종료 시점과 신고 시점 사이의 시간적 간격이 매우 짧은 점, ③ 성관계 이후 피고인과 피해자 사이의 관계에 급격한 변화가 있었다고 볼 만한 정황은 찾을 수 없는 점 등에 비추어 볼 때, 피해자의 신고 경위와 내용이 지극히 자연스럽다.

B) On May 25, 2019, the day after this part of the crime was committed, the victim her flickly flicked to H Hospital at H Hospital around 10:19, the day after this part of the crime was committed, and her flickly flicked the “unflick sex

4) Evaluation of the victim's visible behavior

A) The circumstance that “the Defendant and the victim went to a C hotel” as the victim’s proposal cannot be deemed to have rejected the credibility of the victim’s statement. ① As the victim could not have predicted or induced the Defendant’s assault, the Defendant’s rape cannot be deemed to have predicted or induced the Defendant’s rape. ② At the same time, the Defendant living together and the victim had been fit for using the public accommodation even before they were living together.

Even if the victim had the intent to have sexual intercourse with the Defendant at the time of settling the hotel expenses, in light of the circumstance and content of assaulting the victim, it is reasonable to view that the victim respondeded to sexual intercourse with the Defendant immediately after the assault, and that the Defendant also knew of it.

B) The victim’s statement that “the victim tried to drink a water surface guidance system to the defendant is also difficult to view that the credibility of the victim’s statement is rejected.” It is sufficiently acceptable to the victim’s statement that: (a) prior to the crime of this part, the defendant was suffering from the victim while driving out the external facts; and (b) the victim was also seeking to avoid the Defendant’s pressure to pursue the external facts by taking the external measures through the use of a water surface guidance system in that he/she was taking the external measures.”

C) The mere fact that “the victim did not request to assist the hotel staff entering the hotel room to deliver a mergial paper” does not deny the credibility of the victim’s statement. This is because: ① the relationship between the Defendant and the victim; ② the state of the victim at that time; ③ the Defendant’s pressured the victim in a very rough and disorderly state; ④ the response or attitude of the victim immediately after the assault was harmed.

B. The fact that proximate causal relationship with the assault and intimidation stated in the crime of rape can be recognized

For the following reasons, the defendant's assertion on this part cannot be accepted.

1) The assault and intimidation of a perpetrator in the crime of rape ought to be such an extent as to make it impossible or considerably difficult for the victim to resist. Whether the assault and intimidation is applicable ought to be determined based on the specific situation in which the victim was faced at the time of sexual intercourse, taking into account not only the content and degree of assault and intimidation, the background leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances at the time of sexual intercourse, etc. Furthermore, it should not be readily concluded that the perpetrator’s assault and intimidation did not reach the extent that it would considerably difficult for the victim to resist (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do3071, Jul. 28, 2005; 2006Do5979, Jan. 25, 2007).

2) As seen thereafter, it is difficult to view that the Defendant had had had had had had had had had had had had had had sexual intercourse from the time of assault. There is no direct proximate causal relationship between the act of assault and sexual intercourse.

However, in light of the purport of the Supreme Court precedents, the defendant should be deemed to have exercised the force of force in the crime of rape against the victim. The grounds are as follows.

A) With respect to the circumstances at the time of rape crime, the victim rejected twice at the investigative agency the victim's statement that "at the time of the rape crime, the victim was "the defendant was prompt in his or her sexual organ, but he or she was not able to see the victim's sexual organ." At the time, the victim refused to make a 'the draft'. In addition, the victim stated that "the victim was placed on the part of the victim (the victim) and inserted his or her sexual organ on the part of the bed." The victim stated that "at the court below, the victim could not refuse active refusal of frightening into the bed, but the victim stated that "the victim was so far as he or she did not have any other resistance."

In light of the fact that the victim explicitly refused sexual intercourse, or the content of the assault that the defendant exercised by the victim before the crime of rape was committed and the degree of injury of the victim, the defendant should be deemed to have known that "the victim does not have sexual intercourse with the victim."

B) ① Inasmuch as it is difficult to see “the victim who was seriously injured by the Defendant’s harsh assault” appears to have actively refused or avoided the Defendant’s demand for sexual intercourse with the other Defendant. ② In light of the content and circumstances of the Defendant’s assaulting the victim, the degree and part of the victim’s injury, and the circumstances and details of the Defendant’s coercion to prepare the victim, etc., the Defendant’s additional assault was anticipated at the time of refusal of sexual intercourse was anticipated, and the Defendant was in fact showing such attitude; ③ the Defendant was in extreme interest, and ③ the state of the Defendant’s state of assaulting or coercing the victim without any reasonable reason was continuing to be closed. ④ In light of the time interval between the Defendant and the hotel at the time, it was difficult for the victim at the time to expect another person’s help at the time, and ⑤ the time when the Defendant and the head of the body of sexual intercourse were forced to prepare the victim’s sexual intercourse and at the time of sexual intercourse, etc., the victim ought to be deemed to have been physically and physically unable to have physical resistance due to the Defendant’s.

In addition, as long as the defendant who caused the state of impossibility to resist actively recognized and used the physical and mental condition of the victim, and had sexual intercourse with the victim, the "request for the sexual intercourse of the defendant" was a considerable psychological pressure on the victim, and the defendant also was aware of it.

In the end, the "act of demanding sexual intercourse to the victim who had been drinking by the defendant himself/herself" can be evaluated equally as assault and intimidation referred to in the crime of rape. In addition, proximate causal relationship between the defendant's assault and intimidation and sexual relation can be recognized.

The crime of confinement may be recognized for the following reasons:

1) In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant: (a) made the victim of the victim of the victim in his/her clothes off, and concealed the victim’s cell phone and key to motor vehicle; (b) the Defendant made the victim in his/her toilet to prevent him/her from leaving the hotel room; (c) the Defendant assaulted the victim due to a considerable intensity; (d) made the victim use the camera against the victim’s will; (e) the extent of time the Defendant prevented the victim from leaving the hotel; and (v) the Defendant appears not to have made the victim difficult to request the victim to help the hotel staff in light of the victim’s state at the time, the Defendant should be deemed to have caused the victim not to leave the hotel room or made it considerably difficult to prevent or make it difficult for the victim from leaving the hotel room by means of psychological and physical pressure.

Therefore, the defendant's act constitutes confinement referred to in the crime of confinement.

2) As long as the Defendant seriously infringed on the victim’s physical completeness and sexual self-determination (the protected legal interest in the crime of confinement), the Defendant should be deemed to have committed a crime of confinement separately from the crime of injury and the crime of rape.

D. Sub-committee

The Defendant and the victim together live together with the victim. Such special relationship may serve as the basis for the judgment of innocence. However, a series of acts and the consequences thereof, which were in a hotel, are clearly distinguishable from the previous act in terms of the content, motive, and consequence of the act. Therefore, the Defendant’s allegation in this part of the facts charged in the instant case can be found guilty of the injury, rape, and confinement.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. Summary of judgment

1) In the trial of the lower court, the prosecutor changed the facts charged regarding intimidation in the part not guilty of the lower judgment. The prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment with the date and time of the crime from May 16, 2019 to May 16, 2019, “the date and time of the crime” from May 16, 2019 to “the 14:00 p.m. on May 16, 2019,” and the subject of the judgment was changed with the permission of the lower court. Accordingly, the part of intimidation in

2) Of the judgment below, there is a ground for ex officio reversal of intimidation, but the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts on this part constitutes still subject to a trial by the court of original instance, and thus, it is judged together with the remaining

3) In conclusion, in light of the following: (a) the victim stated the part related to this part of the facts charged from the time when he was investigated by the investigative agency; (b) certain circumstances correspond to the victim’s statement; and (c) the relationship between the Defendant and the victim who may be inferred through the crime of injury, rape, and confinement, there is a strong doubt as to whether the Defendant committed the same crime as those in this part of the facts charged.

However, the Defendant, while denying this part of the crime, raises questions about the circumstances and circumstances at the time of the commission of the crime. As long as the aforementioned written proposal cannot be accepted by social norms, it is necessary to verify the specific facts regarding it. However, it is difficult to readily conclude that the submitted evidence alone was clearly identified. Therefore, it is difficult to readily recognize the Defendant as guilty of this part of the charges in this regard in terms of guaranteeing the Defendant’s right to defense, and thus, it is difficult to accept the Prosecutor’s assertion on this part of the charges. The supplement

B. Determination on the violation of intimidation

1) As indicated in the lower judgment, the content of text messages sent to and received by the Defendant and the victim at the time, and the details of the victim’s credit card use, etc. are difficult to easily blick with the crime under this part. The time of the crime under this part of the facts charged was changed, and such determination does

① In particular, in the case of booms and strings, which the injured party designated as a tool to commit this part of the crime (the diesel, which is a sex instrument) and strings, the Defendant and the injured party were the objects of sexual intercourse, 15) ② The Defendant and the injured party immediately before Jeju-do were given and received text messages to the effect that they have sexual intercourse by using them, 16) ③ Since it appears that the Defendant and the injured party were naturally sent from Jeju-do, it is necessary to check detailed facts about the circumstances at the time.

However, as to the circumstances in which the above text messages were given and received, it is only a statement to the effect that the victim is not a “written text message sent by the court of original instance” or that the victim is not a “written text message sent by the court of original instance,” and it is difficult to readily find the Defendant guilty of this part of

2) The victim also made a statement at an investigative agency to the effect that “the victim was unable to use his phone properly by cutting off his phone from April 8, 2019 to May 16, 2019.” ① The victim appears to have been drafted by coercion of the Defendant, ② The contents of telephone conversations between the Defendant and the victim, ③ the contents of telephone conversations between the Defendant and the F (the victim’s newborn baby) and the contents of telephone conversations between the Defendant and the victim, the Defendant may set a lock on his mobile phone for some period.

However, in light of the fact that the victim appears to have freely given text messages to the Defendant even around May 14, 2019, and that it is difficult to confirm specific text messages given and received by the Defendant and the victim as a result of the victim’s refusal to submit mobile phones, the victim’s statement alone is insufficient to reverse the lower court’s judgment. Ultimately, despite the amendment of indictment, this part of the facts charged cannot be found guilty.

C. Determination as to the violence

1) On May 22, 2019, the victim submitted the relevant photograph 21 to the effect that the Defendant’s head was strokeed and strokeed in the automobile on May 22, 2019. However, the detailed information of the photograph was written “8:11 on May 22, 2019”.

Although the victim stated that he/she was submitted a photograph taken by his/her body at the time, it is difficult to readily recognize that there was the Defendant’s assault, such as the description of this part of the facts charged, as long as it is difficult to eliminate the possibility of being taken prior to the time of the occurrence of this part of the crime.

2) At the court below, the victim stated in the court below that "at the time, he had a telephone conversation with U who is a new dynamics in a vehicle with U and Skickphone. U was examined against the defendant, and the defendant abused himself after telephone conversations. At the time, himself and the defendant stated that "at the time, he and the defendant went to a cell phone store to obtain the details of the victim's cell phone calls."

However, insofar as there is no specific evidence that the victim was actually a victim of the instant telephone conversation with U and the victim was issued with the content of the telephone conversation and the time when the victim was issued, it is difficult to readily find the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, as long as this part of the crime was not presented.

(d)a special threat;

1) As indicated in the lower judgment, there is somewhat insufficient consistency in the victim’s statement.

A) The victim, at the police investigation (2th), stated that "the defendant would cause harm to the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the

B) However, in the court of the court below, the victim stated in the court below that "the defendant was forced by the defendant to her (the victim) to her with a 's cell gate with a 'brush test'. The victim stated that "the defendant was forced by her 's cell gate,' and "the defendant was her cell gate before her driving a motor vehicle again, whether the defendant was her cell gate before her driving a motor vehicle, and whether he was her on board the motor vehicle with cell gate.

In comparison with the statement of investigation agency, this is different from the statement of investigation agency, such as ‘specific situation, atmosphere, place where the defendant was drinking off the cell house.'

2) The Defendant stated, at the prosecution, that “If she was at the head of the cell and she was at the bar and the victim was at the bar, she said that she was well at the bar, but she was not at the victim’s threat, but at the bar match.”

In light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the circumstance where the Defendant was drinking off a cell, and the situation where the cell was placed, etc., it is difficult to avoid the possibility that the Defendant merely fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly, as alleged by the Defendant, with the intent to fly fly fly frankly fly fly fly fly

(e) The point of rape injury;

In the following respect, it is not enough to recognize that the defendant was injured by the victim in the opportunity for rape.

1) ① The time when the defendant rapes the victim is presumed to have been around 22:30 on May 24, 2019. The statement written by the victim immediately after the victim 112 was stated in the statement made by the victim after 112 report that "the defendant assaults himself on May 5, 2019; 18:00-19:00 to 19:00 on April 24, 2019; 28) ② immediately after the assault, the defendant made the victim write the body above; ② After the assault, the defendant made the victim write the face above; and thereafter, the victim check the face in order to deduct the face. In light of the above, there is a aspect that the circumstance that the defendant abused the victim; the circumstance that the defendant made the victim write the body of the victim; the circumstances that the defendant had the victim raped the victim.

2) It is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant had the intent to rape with the time of the assault. The circumstance that the Defendant only finiteed her intention to force the victim’s external appearance or to take responsibility for pecuniary damage over a considerable time, and that there was no finite her intention to directly or indirectly related to the sexual crime, or attempted to have her unnecessary physical contact, is available in that it is difficult to find out.

4. Determination on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court and the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable for the appellate court to respect the lower court’s sentencing (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

B. The result of this part of the crime is very important. ① The Defendant committed a serious injury to the victim who was a fluorous victim at the end of the assault by a harsh method; ② the Defendant was raped by the victim who was fluoring the above injury; ③ the personal attachment of the Defendant, and the degree of emotional distress and emotional deprivation suffered by the victim due to this part of the crime (this part of the crime is the case where the victim complained of uneasiness and anti-competitive disorder).

④ Although participating in the process of conciliation in civil procedure, the following facts are considered as unfavorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant did not receive a victim’s letter; (b) the Defendant did not recover damage; (c) the Defendant wanted to punish the Defendant; and (f) the Defendant cannot be deemed to seriously reflect his/her mistake from the victim’s perspective.

C. ① Although there is no room for defense in terms of the motive or consequence of the crime, it is difficult to readily conclude that the submitted evidence alone has committed the crime under this part of the plan from the beginning, and ② the fact that the defendant does not have been subject to criminal punishment for the same or similar crime is considered as favorable to the defendant.

D. It is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable in light of the following factors, including the Defendant’s age, career, environment, relationship with the victim, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc. (including the sentencing data added in the trial) as stated in the instant argument (including the sentencing data added in the trial), and the scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, and the scope of applicable sentences, etc.

5. Conclusion

The appeal by the defendant against the guilty portion of the judgment below and the appeal by the prosecutor on the charge of assault, special intimidation, or rape injury among the acquittal portion of the judgment below is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Since there is a ground for ex officio reversal among the acquittal portion of the judgment below, there is a ground for reversal ex officio, this is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act and it

【Reasons for the Judgment(Intimidation)】

The facts charged in this part of the facts charged are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except that the court below’s 20th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 201 "round May 16, 2019" is "on May 16, 2019."

Judges

Judge Ma-gu of the presiding judge

Judges Choi Jin-hee

Judges Cho Young-young

Note tin

1) The Defendant does not dispute the issue of injury.

(ii) evidence records 570, 572 pages

(iii) evidence records 92 pages, 789 pages, 780 pages;

4) Evidence records 29 to 37 pages

5) 172 pages of the trial records

(vi) evidence records 570 pages, 572 pages

7) Evidence Records 527-529 pages, 554-59 pages, 990-99 pages, 1,037 pages, 1,042 pages, 1,048 pages, 1,053 pages, 1,054 pages, 1,055 pages, etc.

(viii) 46 pages of evidence, 173 pages of the trial records.

9) Evidence records 110 pages

(x) 11 pages, 12 pages of evidence records;

1) Evidence records 791 pages

12) Evidence records 46 pages

13) 173 pages of the trial records

14) Evidence records 47 pages

15) Evidence records 241 pages, 74 pages of the trial records

16) Evidence records 1,184 pages, 1,185 pages, 1,082 pages

17) Evidence records 64 pages

18) Evidence records 54 pages

19) Evidence records 226 to 229 pages

20) Evidence records 1,138 pages 1,181 pages

21) Evidence records 491 pages

22) According to the content of the evidence records 492 pages, this appears to have been created by compressing the photographs taken on May 21, 2019 at around 23:11.

23) The trial records 178 pages

24) 156 to 159 pages of the trial records

25) Evidence records 61 pages

26) 161 to 162 pages of the trial records

27) Evidence records 959 pages

28) Evidence records 11 pages

29) The trial records 324 pages

30) The 8th day of the lower judgment appears to be a clerical error in the “15 years”.

심급 사건

-서울서부지방법원 2020.2.20.선고 2019고합246

서울고등법원 2020.6.30.선고 2020노553

참조조문