logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.07.14 2016노948
강간등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) The Defendant, in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, special confinement, and special public conflicts, takes photographs of the body against the victim’s will at the Fel, and causes the victim to prepare a written confirmation of the fact that he/she had a third person make a male and female tour and travel.

However, since the defendant did not have excessive possession, there is no fact that there was no fact that the defendant threatened the victim, or forced the victim to prepare a letter to the effect that he would exempt the defendant from the obligation to the victim.

The victim was in the telecom by free will, and there is no fact that the defendant had detained the victim.

2) On September 1, 2014, the Defendant did not have a sexual relationship with the victim on two occasions at the beginning and end of the month. On August 18, 2014, and April 13, 2015, the Defendant only has a sexual relationship under an agreement with the victim.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts 1) The Defendant asserted that this part of the appeal is identical to the grounds for appeal in the lower court.

Under the title of “determination on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion”, the lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted, found the following circumstances in its reasoning: (a) the Defendant taken photographs of the victim’s body against the victim’s will as stated in the facts constituting a crime; (b) made the victim prepare a written statement of the above contents; and (c) accepted all the facts that the Defendant detained the victim by threatening the victim by threatening him.

The decision was determined.

The court below held that the following circumstances can be further acknowledged based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below.

arrow