beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (7 million won of a fine) is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination
A. We examine ex officio the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the first crime in the judgment, and examine the first crime in the original adjudication.
The summary of this part of the facts charged is that "the defendant abused the body of victims by using verbal abuse and violence respectively to victim D and victim E, and commits emotional abuse that harms mental health and development."
In addition, the court below recognized all the facts charged and found that each abuse of victims constitutes Article 71 (1) 2 and Article 17 (1) 3 of the Child Welfare Act, and each crime constitutes concurrent crimes.
No person under Article 17 of the Child Welfare Act shall commit any of the following acts:
Above 1
2. (Omission)
3. Committing physical abuse against a child that may injure his/her body or injure his/her physical health and development;
4. Deleted.
5. A person who violates the provisions of Article 71 (Penalty Provisions) (1) through (11) shall be punished by the following:
1. (Omission)
2. Any person who commits an act falling under subparagraphs 3 through 8 shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won;
Above 3
4. (Omission) (2) If a child abuser commits an emotional abuse beyond his/her emotional abuse and thereby causes physical injury to a child victim, only the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act due to physical abuse shall be established;
(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do6015 Decided October 13, 2011). According to the record, the Defendant’s use of violence against victims on December 13, 2014, the fact that the victim D was damaged (the first instance trial record No. 62), and the victim E was damaged (the first instance trial record No. 9, 76 of the original trial record).
Nevertheless, the lower court did not err by committing physical abuse.