Decisions

All

TITLE	Supreme Court Decision 2012Do7377 Decided August 20, 2012[Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof (rape of a minor under 13 years of age, etc.)] [full Text]
Summary
[1] Whether the prosecutor must prove that the defendant raped the victim while being aware that the victim was under 13 years old, for the crime provided by Article 8-2 (1) of the previous Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof to be constituted (affirmative); and whether the objective fact of the victims's age is in itself basis for assuming that the defendant was aware of her age (negative) [2] In a case where the defendant was accused of violating the previous Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof by raping the victim who was a minor under 13 (female, 12 years old): the case holding that the judgment below had errors in the misapprehension of the principle of the burden of proof at a criminal trial, since the fact of whether the defendant was at least aware that the victim may be under 13 was proven cannot be easily determined

TITLE

Supreme Court Decision 2012Do7377 Decided August 20, 2012[Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof (rape of a minor under 13 years of age, etc.)] [full Text]

Summary

[1] Whether the prosecutor must prove that the defendant raped the victim while being aware that the victim was under 13 years old, for the crime provided by Article 8-2 (1) of the previous Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof to be constituted (affirmative); and whether the objective fact of the victims's age is in itself basis for assuming that the defendant was aware of her age (negative) [2] In a case where the defendant was accused of violating the previous Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof by raping the victim who was a minor under 13 (female, 12 years old): the case holding that the judgment below had errors in the misapprehension of the principle of the burden of proof at a criminal trial, since the fact of whether the defendant was at least aware that the victim may be under 13 was proven cannot be easily determined

Prev	Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1763 Decided September 13, 2012[Medical Service Act Violation]
Next	Supreme Court Decision 2012Do5862 decided August 17, 2012[Violation of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders]

list