beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order; 1) Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) are only the Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”).
(2) The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. (2) The sentence (one2 years of imprisonment, etc.) sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.
B. Prosecutor 1) In the instant charges of mistake of facts (not guilty part) and the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with the Disabled) on June 7, 2013 among the facts charged in the instant case, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult for the court below to believe the victim’s statement consistent with this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The above sentence imposed by the court below of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.
3. The judgment of the court below which dismissed the request for attachment order since the defendant's improper dismissal of the attachment order is recognized to pose a risk of recidivism.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also asserted the same purport as this part of the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in detail under the title “judgment on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion”.
In full view of the circumstances and circumstances acknowledged by the court below, we affirm the above determination as justifiable.
In relation to the crime on June 3, 2013, the defendant alleged that he went to the hospital on that day. However, according to the fact inquiry about the head of the Busan Regional Headquarters of the National Health Insurance Corporation, which is impeachment materials, the defendant took place at the hospital.