beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who is in charge of carrying the joint seal of “C” and the victim D (the victim’s age 21) from July 2010 to September 2014, the Defendant was a person who had carried the said joint seal and received a joint training from the Defendant.
On August 8, 2010, at around 13:20, the Defendant 13:20 on the first day of Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon: “C” operated by the Defendant located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon; after cleaning the joint base, the Defendant sent the victim (the 13 years of age at the time) who was located in the office in the office, with the seal affixed to the floor, and opened the body on the floor. According to the Defendant’s instructions, the Defendant took over the victim’s body back to the floor, such as the victim who diversed on the floor, etc.; then, the Defendant took the victim’s clothes and panty with the Defendant’s body’s body back in the future; followed the Defendant’s sexual flag into the part of the victim, and had sexual intercourse once by inserting it into the part of the victim.
Accordingly, the defendant has sexual intercourse with a child victim by force.
2. Although the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that they had sexual intercourse with the victim at the time and place stated in the facts charged of the instant case, they did so under the agreement with the victim and did not exercise their power.
3. Determination
A. In a criminal trial, the recognition of a crime ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value that leads a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such convictions may lead to such convictions, even if there is doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201). In particular, the defendant consistently denies the facts charged and the victim’s statement is made by direct evidence that conforms to the facts charged in the record.