beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charge, despite the credibility of the victim H’s statement consistent with the summary of the grounds for appeal and the finding of the charge of the instant case guilty based on the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is G apartment audit, and the victim H (V, the age of 47) served from around 201 to September 2014 as the U.S. dollars for the instant apartment.
On July 12, 2014, at around 22:00, the Defendant: (a) 22:00, near the J in Busan Eastdong-gu I, and (b) 2 Defendant 1 and 2 Defendant 1 and 2 Defendant 1 were to singing in the singing room; (c) she was to sit on the shoulder of the injured party while she was to sit on the right side of the injured party; and (d) her chest was to take off on the shoulder of the injured party; and (e) she forced the injured party to use the bucks of the injured party.
B. The lower court determined as follows, on the grounds that it is difficult to believe the H’s statement and the remaining evidence alone is insufficient to recognize it, and thus, determined that there was no proof of crime as to the above facts charged, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act
① The apartment H, which is the cause of the apartment, was to clean the corridor of the floor in which the defendant was living, and then open a door if the defendant was living together with his house, and if the defendant was living together with his house, H visited the house of the defendant to the house of the defendant and she was living together with the defendant to the end of the vehicle. ② If the auditor of the apartment H did not respond to the demand of the defendant who was a representative meeting of the occupants of the apartment H, it would be able to suffer any disadvantage in his status from the defendant, so that she could have his relative, the defendant and her relatives on the day of the instant case, as well as her relatives on the day of the instant case.
One of the arguments is that H is the president of the apartment house that can exercise a greater influence on oneself.