logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.04.23 2015도1424
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인강간)등
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the prosecutor's appeal

A. In a criminal trial, the conviction of guilt should be based on evidence with probative value, which could lead a judge to have a conviction of not having a reasonable doubt, to the extent that the facts charged are true. Unless such proof is given, the conviction of the defendant cannot be determined even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823 Decided August 21, 2001, and Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675 Decided March 9, 2006, etc.). Furthermore, the selection of evidence and the probative value of evidence, which are based on the premise of fact finding, belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

(Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act).

(1) As to the primary charges on the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Persons with Disabilities), the lower court determined that the first instance court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, rejected the credibility of the victim’s statement on the content that sexual intercourse was established in the Defendant and her mother and the content that forced sexual intercourse was established, and found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the part of the conjunctive charges on the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (rape with Persons with Disabilities) added at the lower court, is difficult to recognize the credibility of the part of the victim’s statement on sexual relation at the Defendant and her mother, and on the grounds stated in its reasoning, it was not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of a crime.

C. The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing such determination by the lower court, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belong to the free judgment by the lower court

In addition, the above legal principles and the judgment of the court below are examined.

arrow