The prosecution also requested a heavy sentence in the appeal trial of a school bus driver who was put on trial on charges of sexually assaulting a high school girl who was안전놀이터 his child’s friend for several years.
However, the defendant, who claimed innocence in the first trial, saying, “I went to a motel but only talked,” also claimed innocence in the appeal trial, saying it was “unfair.”
On the 6th, the Daejeon High Prosecutors’ Office held a hearing held by the Daejeon High Court’s 1st Criminal Division (Chief Judge Song Seok-bong) to determine whether Mr. A (56) violated the Act on Sexual Protection of Children and Adolescents and violated the Special Act on Punishment of Rape and Sexual Violence Crimes (Threatening using filmed videos, etc.) The appeals court in the alleged case requested, “Dismiss the defendant’s appeal and sentence him to the same 15 years in prison as the original trial.”
Regarding this, Mr. A claimed, “The complainant did not take the school bus to school and went to meet a male student in the afternoon, so I admonished him,” and added, “It is unfair. The only fault I have is that I took a picture.”
He was sent to trial on charges of sexual assault on 26 occasions at the driver’s office and motel until January 2021, including using a naked photo of his child’s friend, Ms. B, taken at the school driver’s office in 2017 and sexually assaulting her by threatening to distribute it. .
It was investigated that he committed this act by approaching Miss B, who used his car to go to school, when she was contemplating going to university, saying he would introduce her to a professor she knew.
In the original trial, Mr. A claimed, “Mrs. B handed me her cell phone and asked me to take a picture, saying she had to do it for an assignment at school, so I reluctantly took a nude picture,” while denying the charge, saying, “I went to the motel, but we only talked outside.” did.
The first trial court sentenced him to 15 years in prison, the same sentence as the prosecution, saying, “The defendant committed the crime by taking advantage of his position of trust as a friend’s father, but he consistently made absurd excuses and damaged the victim’s reputation.”
Mr. A appealed on the grounds of misconception of facts, misunderstanding of the law, and unfair sentencing. The next trial will be held on the 20th of next month.