logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.06.12 2020노78
간음약취등
Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles concerning the defendant and the person subject to the request for an attachment order (hereinafter only referred to as the defendant) ① The defendant tried to assist the victim to appear in the toilet and did not intend to have sexual intercourse; and (b) the defendant's act does not constitute abduction for the purpose of sexual intercourse, since the victim was carrying the victim on board against the victim's will or carrying the victim under the defendant's factual control by using violence, intimidation, or de facto force; and (c) the defendant's act does not constitute abduction for the purpose of sexual intercourse; (b) the victim was not in the state of mental disorder or escape until entering the instant officetel, and the victim was placed in the vehicle of the defendant; (d) there was no indecent act by force by using the victim's refusal to resist; (e) there was no intention of indecent act; (g) the defendant's defense counsel withdrawn from the summary of oral proceedings on June 3, 202, which was submitted after the closing of argument in the court of unfair sentencing.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the ground that the sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable. 2) The Defendant, who was dismissed by the attachment order, committed another crime during the suspension of execution due to quasi-rape, which is the same sex offense, and thus, dismissed the Defendant’s request for the attachment order even if the risk of recidivism is recognized, is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The summary of the judgment of the court below and the defense counsel at the court below also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of the crime of kidnapping sexual intercourse.

arrow