logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2016.08.08 2015고합103 (1)
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인위계등추행)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On April 26, 2015, between 23:00 and 29, the Defendant was in place to find out a wife at the D Hospital 427 sick room in North-gu C (hereinafter “the sick room in this case”) at the port of Mapo-si, North Korea (hereinafter “the sick room in this case”), and the Defendant would die with the victim E (Grade 64 and 2) who could not freely move out of the body due to physical disability in which the wife was hospitalized in the sick room in the same ward as the diving.

The phrase " full guidance..........", the victim's left hand and the defendant's sexual flag was laid down toward the victim's sexual flag.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim with a physical disability by force.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the conviction in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which leads to the judge’s conviction that leads to a lack of reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the level to ensure such conviction, the determination should be made in the interests of the defendant even if the defendant was suspected of guilt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do13416, Jul. 24, 2014). Meanwhile, in order to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged by consistently denying the facts charged and directly proving evidence consistent with the facts charged on the record, the victim’s statement is sufficiently flexible, and the remainder of evidence is merely a specialized evidence based on the victim’s statement, in order to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged based on only the victim’s statement, the admissibility and accuracy of the statement requires high probative value, and when determining whether the victimized person satisfies such probative value, the reasonableness, consistency, and objective reasonableness of the statement made by the victimized person, as well as personal character factors of the victim (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do1314.

arrow