Whether cancellation of a complaint may be deemed where the mother of parental authority, who is a legal representative of the victim of rape, prepares a written agreement to the effect that he/she will take a favorable disposition of the defendant and submits it to a court.

The mere fact that the mother, who is the legal representative of the victim, was expressed in the court that he/she would disrupt the disposition of the defendant's relative because he/she received the medical expenses of the defendant's wife due to the assault by the defendant, cannot be deemed to have completely withdrawn the victim's intention of complaint.

Articles 224, 225, and 232 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 4288 Form 109 delivered on June 28, 195 (Supreme Court Decision 249Nu26 delivered on June 26, 195)

Defendant

Daejeon District Court of the first instance (Seoul High Court Decision 74Gohap17)

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

120 days out of the number of days of confinement before sentencing shall be included in the sentence of the original judgment.

The gist of the grounds for appeal asserted by the defense counsel of the defendant is as follows: first, with respect to the crime of attempted rape among the facts in the original trial, the mother of the parental authority, who is the legal representative of the victim, has cancelled the complaint before the pronouncement of the judgment below; thus, the court below should have dismissed the part of the indictment; second, the court below's punishment against the defendant is too heavy in light of the fact that the opening of the sentence is obvious and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

Therefore, as to the first point of appeal, the first point of appeal is that the facts No. 2 were included in the crime of attempted rape, and part of the judgment of the court below, the non-indicted 2, the legal representative other than the non-indicted 1, the victim, received 500,000 won or more at the expense of the victim's injury treatment due to the defendant's assault on June 4, 1974, before the day of the judgment of the court below, and agreed that the non-indicted 2, the victim's father, received 50,000 won or more at the expense of the victim's injury treatment due to the defendant's assault. However, it is acknowledged by the records that the court of appeal submitted to the court below that the victim's legal representative who suffered serious injury due to the defendant's attempted rape not only did the victim's attempted rape, but also gave a compromise in receiving the medical treatment costs due to the defendant's attempted rape, and thus, it cannot be seen that the defendant's strong punishment was completely withdrawn from the defendant's intention to commit rape. Second, this part of appeal is justified.

Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit. Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed by Article 36 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and 120 days out of the number of days of confinement before the judgment is rendered in accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act.

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

Judges Jeon Soo-soo (Presiding Judge)