(영문) 부산고등법원 2017.02.02 2016노665 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산고등법원 2017.02.02 2016노665

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자준강제추행)

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding the facts (the guilty part of the judgment of the court below) did not commit an indecent act against the victim who was locked in his room as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below.

In addition, the victim was not in the state of resistance or loss of body and body.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the victim of this part of the facts charged by taking the statements in the investigative agency of the victim without consistency and credibility. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (a two and a half years of imprisonment, and an eight and a half hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges, although according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor including the victim’s statement in the investigation agency on August 8, 2015 (the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes committed against a minor under 13 years of age) by the lower court, although it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant committed a crime against the victim in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a indecent act by force against a minor under 13 years of age) as stated in this part of the facts charged, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the charges.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also asserted the same purport, and on that basis, based on the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning based on the evidence admitted by the evidence of the lower court, the lower court held that the Defendant was the victim (i.e.,, the victim who was diving in his intrusion as indicated in the facts constituting a crime in the lower judgment, and the physical resistance is either absolutely impossible or considerably difficult.

참조조문

-성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2021.01.26 2020고합229

-인천지방법원 2018.02.09 2017고합791

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.01.15 2015고합298

-울산지방법원 2017.07.06 2017고합73

-서울남부지방법원 2017.10.13 2017노1001