(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.23 2020노3414 | 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) 수원지방법원 2020.12.23 2020노3414

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the following: (a) the statement of the victim of mistake of facts is not only based on an obvious error of memory but also contradictory parts; (b) the credibility of the statement is impossible for the defendant to be recognized; (c) the fact that the defendant had to move his body inevitably due to bus operation; and (d) the fact that the nature of CCTV images is unclear and the body of the defendant cannot be readily determined to have contacted the body of the victim; and (d) the defendant did not have any intent to commit indecent act against the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of 2 million won, 40 hours’ order to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In examining the results of the first instance court’s examination of facts in light of the principle of court-oriented trial, etc. as to the assertion of mistake of facts and the results of further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of argument in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s judgment as to the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance unless there are exceptional cases deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance court’s judgment as is on the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14409, Feb. 25, 2010). The lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant charges

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below closely, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts alleged by the defendant.

B. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle on the assertion of unfair sentencing, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in a case where there exists a unique area of the first instance court concerning the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing

Supreme Court Decision 200

참조조문

-형사소송법

참조판례

-대법원 2010. 2. 25. 선고 2009도14409 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2019.02.20 2018노2711

-광주지방법원 2019.11.20 2019노926

-광주지방법원 2019.09.18 2018노3531

-광주지방법원 2019.01.09 2018노2033

-인천지방법원 2020.05.29 2019노3298