logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.01.24 2018노3426
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant sold the Defendant’s vehicle by way of erroneous determination of facts (as to the conflict of interest), with the victim, and the victim was committed with the promise and did not work together, thereby causing damage.

Therefore, the victim did not go through intimidation from the defendant, but voluntarily used the victim's vehicle to compensate for the damage, and 2 million won was given to the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment, 40 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, 3 years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) According to the evidence examined by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant, as stated in paragraph (2) of the crime of the lower judgment, threatened the victim to use the victim’s vehicle and received KRW 2 million from the victim can be acknowledged. 2) Intimidation as the means of the crime of attack refers to notifying the harm and injury likely to be drinking to the extent that it limits the freedom of decision-making or interferes with the freedom of decision-making, and the realization of the harm and injury so notified does not necessarily require that it itself is unlawful.

Even if a threat of harm and injury is used as a means of realizing a right, if it is a means of intimidation and makes the other party drink by means of intimidation, and if the means of realizing a right exceeds the permissible level or scope under the social norms, a crime of intimidation is established.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2014Do13615 Decided October 29, 2015, and Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6406 Decided October 11, 2007, etc.). Even if the Defendant has the right to demand compensation for damages, in light of the Defendant’s circumstance, details, etc., the Defendant’s act is deemed as having the right to demand compensation by means of intimidation, and the Defendant’s act goes beyond the degree and scope permitted by social norms, and thus, the crime of conflict is established.

3..

arrow