logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.05.29 2019노4091
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that the victim of mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are against the direction of the defendant's progress and the actual direction of the defendant at the time of the occurrence of the case stated in the court below, the defendant was not in a situation in which people could commit an indecent act against the victim because he was in moving with beer and cellular phone at the time, and that the victim was very concentrated at the time, and the content of CCTV images was also damaged to the degree that he could mislead the defendant about the truth.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine, etc.) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles regarding the assertion of mistake of facts should not be rejected without permission unless there exists any other evidence that objectively shows credibility, in a case where the statements made by witnesses, including the victim, are consistent and consistent with the facts charged. In this case, the credibility of the statement should not be readily denied solely on the ground that the statements made by the witness are consistent in the major part of the statement, and that the statements made by the witness are somewhat inconsistent with the statements concerning other minor matters (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In this case, the evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the court below and the following facts and circumstances recognized thereby, the defendant was proven without reasonable deliberation that the defendant included the parts as the bridge between the victim as described in the facts charged in this case and committed an indecent act, and that there was an intentional indecent act in such behavior.

arrow