beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. There was no desire for the victim to see the misunderstanding of fact, and to see the victim's her her m, her m, and to see that the victim's her m, or her m, was her m, as described in the facts charged, or that the victim's m, was her her m, as described in the facts charged.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (4 months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, and 40 hours of lecture for sexual assault treatment) is too unreasonable.
2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant could fully recognize the victim’s her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her t
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant, and thus, the defendant's allegation of the above
① In a case where a witness’s statement, including the victim, is mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless there exist any separate and reliable evidence to deem the credibility of the statement objectively deemed objectively and objectively (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). The victim, from an investigative agency to the court below, made a consistent statement on the facts of damage, the process of the case, and the situation before and after the victim’s statement, etc., to the extent that it is difficult for the victim to make a statement without experience, and there is no other circumstance to suspect the credibility of the victim’s statement.
(2) When the victim initially embarraths the defendant's embarrath, he thought it to be the emnath, and later returned to the defendant, and later he left as soon as possible after giving attention to the defendant, but the second defendant is again.