Cases of denying the consistent statement of the rape victim;

In light of the circumstances of the defendant and the victim's accommodation and the situation of the accommodation, it is recognized that the defendant and the victim was a liver.

Article 301 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Seoul District Court's Northern Branch (81 Highly 45)

We reverse the original judgment.

The defendant is innocent.

The gist of the first point in the grounds for appeal of the defendant is that the victim and the defendant had a remaining fact at the dormitory of the factory where the defendant had worked on the day before the case, and at the same time, the above victim has requested the defendant to have a sexual relation, but at that time, the defendant refused to have a sexual relation with several persons, such as the park in the factory other than the defendant and the above victim, and only two the next day have agreed to have a sexual relation with the defendant, and only two persons had a sexual relation with the defendant at this time under the mutual agreement and agreement, but the court below recognized that two persons had a sexual intercourse with the above victim by force and suffered sexual intercourse with the above victim and caused rape, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the judgment was erroneous. The second point in the grounds for appeal of the defendant and the summary of the grounds for appeal by state appointed defense counsel are too unreasonable.

Therefore, I first examine the grounds of appeal No. 1 of the defendant.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, on January 20, 1981: 22: 45, the court below acknowledged that the defendant made the victim (the 17 years old) who was found to have been employed by the defendant at a mar cafeteria in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, to have his house take the house late at night, leading the female to a alley, leading the female to a alley, and forced him to take the mar in Busan located in the same Dong (hereinafter referred to as "the mar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar s, and sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar sar s.).

However, as seen above, the Defendant denies the criminal facts of this case, and therefore, compared the above evidence adopted by the court below with records, the above evidence is examined.

(1) The Defendant consistently and consistently stated that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim two times in the above room in the prosecution room prior to the prosecution room, but stated that there was no fact of forced sexual intercourse with the victim. As such, the Defendant’s statement in the court room or the protocol of interrogation of the suspect as to the Defendant prepared by the public prosecutor cannot be a evidence to acknowledge the above facts.

(2) In light of the suspect interrogation protocol on the defendant in the preparation of handling affairs by judicial police officers, the statement shown in the above facts charged is recorded, but this cannot be viewed as evidence of guilt in light of the defendant's statement to the prosecution court prior to the trial court prior to the prosecution and the facts subsequent thereto.

(3) The protocol of interrogation of Nonindicted Party 1 as to the preparation of administrative affairs by judicial police officers is nothing more than the fact that the defendant and the victim were accommodated in the deliberation of the judgment at the same time. Thus, according to the records of the victim interrogation protocol as to the persons who prepared the prosecutor's investigation, the above facts charged cannot be evidence. However, according to the records of the victim interrogation protocol as to the persons who prepared the prosecutor's investigation, there are parts of the facts charged that the defendant appeared next to the defendant's investigation at the police when he was investigated by the police, which correspond to the facts charged that the defendant was aware of the fact that he followed the defendant's investigation at the time of the investigation at the police, it is nothing more than a professional statement whose contents are the defendant's statement, and the statement at the police of the defendant cannot be admitted as evidence

(4) The medical examination of injury against the victim in non-indicted 2 prepared by the doctor cannot be a evidence that the defendant rapes the victim. Accordingly, the evidence that conforms to the facts charged in this case is not a witness's statement in the original trial and the trial court and each statement of the same person prepared by the prosecutor and the judicial police officer, and the summary of the statement is replaced by the following.

In other words, the victim had worked in the same factory one year prior to the defendant and approximately 1 year prior to the arrival of the victim. At around 30, Jan. 21, 1981, the problem of finding employment was about 5:0, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul (hereinafter omitted), where the defendant met the defendant at the restaurant on the roof 5,00 dong-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul (hereinafter omitted), where the defendant delayed the night, going to go to the house, and going to the house, and going to the house in the middle of the Busan located in the same Dong-dong (hereinafter omitted), the defendant first went to the house, but the victim was forced to go to go to the house, and tried to have sexual intercourse with him, "I am out of the house, and am out of the house, and am out of the house."

However, even if the victim's statement was made, the victim did not enter the above house prior to this case, and the victim was slick with the other female employees at the time of his service, and the victim was slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly, but the victim's house was slickly slickly slickly slickly and slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly slickly.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that imposed the defendant on the crime of bodily injury resulting from rape shall not be exempted from reversal without determining the allegation of unreasonable sentencing, which is an unlawful fact finding facts without evidence.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is decided as follows. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows: around 22:45 on Jan. 20, 1981, the defendant sought to find the defendant in a restaurant with the answer of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 5 Maok-dong 5 Maok-dong Maok-dong dong-dong dong dong-dong dong dong-dong dong dong-dong dong-dong dong-dong dong-dong dong-dong dong-dong dong-dong dong dong-dong dong dong dong-dong dong dong dong dong dong Do-dong dong dong-dong dong dong her way to get the defendant to find a job late at night, leading the victim (17 years of age), leading the defendant to a alley-dong her so that he could not have sexual intercourse with the latter part of the Criminal Procedure Act for 20 days, and there is no evidence to find the defendant to have been rape.

However, the prosecutor revised the indictment for the first time, and added the following ancillary charges to the defendant.

In other words, the defendant, on January 20, 1981, 22: 45, at around 5, the defendant found a minor victim (the age of 17) who had been able to find employment at a restaurant in Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, 5 Maok-gu, Seoul by inducing him to go to the house, leading him to the house, leading him to the alleyway, leading him, leading him into the room in Busan, and forced him to do sexual intercourse, and then he takes the son from his own seat in order to do so, it is difficult for him to see that he would have died of his sexual intercourse with the latter part of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is also difficult for him to see that he would be able to make a statement by force, such as the victim's scambling and scambling, without being able to have sexual intercourse with the victim's scambling and scambling by force.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Young-jin (Presiding Judge)