beta
Text
Defendant
The appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court (five years of imprisonment, 80 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) The date and time of the instant crime of mistake of facts is February 6, 2015 and the date and time the victim wants to leave the child’s mountain father and child of the former North Korean University on February 9, 2015. Even if based on the result of the inquiry and reply on the fact-finding with regard to the father and child of the former North Korean University, the victim may sufficiently explain the facts of injury as stated in the facts charged at the date and time of the instant crime, and even if part of women are women, they may not have a blood transfusion even if they were forced, it cannot be deemed contradictory to the facts charged. Considering that the victim’s statement was made in detail on February 6, 2015, and considering that the victim’s damage occurred on February 6, 2015, the lower court acquitted the victim of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape, etc.) and acquitted the decision of the lower court that the disclosure order was unreasonably exempted and unjust.
2. Determination:
A. The judgment of the court below on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts [the part on acquittal of the defendant for reasons of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the part on acquittal of the defendant's injury caused by rape)] is not likely to have suffered injury due to the defendant's sexual intercourse on February 6, 2015, on the other hand, in light of the fact that the defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim as stated in this part of the crime, the victim had sexual intercourse with the victim, and the victim had no extenuating circumstances to establish a sexual relationship with another male, other than the defendant, at the time of the case. The above injury was caused by the defendant's sexual intercourse