Decisions

All

TITLE	Supreme Court Decision 2018Do9781 Decided February 4, 2021 【Quasi-Indecent Act by Compulsion】 [full Text]
Summary
【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Legal interest protected by the crime of quasi-indecent act by compulsion as prescribed in Article 299 of the Criminal Act (held: passive right to sexual self- determination) [2] Meaning of the “condition of unconsciousness” and “inability to resist” in the crime of quasi-rape and crime of quasi-indecent act by compulsion In the case where the victim is deep asleep, intoxicated by alcohol or other drugs, and has temporarily lost consciousness, or even if not having fallen into total unconsciousness, is unable to exercise sound judgment and demonstrate the ability to respond and control on such grounds, whether the victim’s state of mind and body constitutes either the condition of unconsciousness or inability to resist, as stipulated in the crime of quasi-rape and the crime of quasi-indecent act (affirmative) [3] Meaning of an “alcohol blackout” and how it differs from passing out Standards for determining whether the victim was either unconscious or unable to resist at the time of the crime in the case where the Defendant, indicted on the charge of committing quasi-rape or quasi-indecent acts by compulsion against the victim who was drunk and lapsed into unconsciousness, alleges to the effect that the victim was in an alcohol blackout, stating that the victim was not unconscious at the time of the crime, but rather, the victim had memory lapses Whether it is possible to readily conclude, on the sole basis of fragmentary appearance of the victim, that the victim was an alcohol blackout and thus did not fall unconscious in the case where: (a) it was revealed that the victim had been in a state of abnormality to the point of suspecting unconsciousness in view of the circumstances objectively observed prior and subsequent to the facts of offense; or (b) in light of the relationship of the victim and the Defendant, assuming that the victim was in a normal condition, it is accepted that the victim was by no means expected to engage in a sexual act with the Defendant or even passively consent to sexual activity with the Defendant (negative)

TITLE

Supreme Court Decision 2018Do9781 Decided February 4, 2021 【Quasi-Indecent Act by Compulsion】 [full Text]

Summary

【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Legal interest protected by the crime of quasi-indecent act by compulsion as prescribed in Article 299 of the Criminal Act (held: passive right to sexual self- determination) [2] Meaning of the “condition of unconsciousness” and “inability to resist” in the crime of quasi-rape and crime of quasi-indecent act by compulsion In the case where the victim is deep asleep, intoxicated by alcohol or other drugs, and has temporarily lost consciousness, or even if not having fallen into total unconsciousness, is unable to exercise sound judgment and demonstrate the ability to respond and control on such grounds, whether the victim’s state of mind and body constitutes either the condition of unconsciousness or inability to resist, as stipulated in the crime of quasi-rape and the crime of quasi-indecent act (affirmative) [3] Meaning of an “alcohol blackout” and how it differs from passing out Standards for determining whether the victim was either unconscious or unable to resist at the time of the crime in the case where the Defendant, indicted on the charge of committing quasi-rape or quasi-indecent acts by compulsion against the victim who was drunk and lapsed into unconsciousness, alleges to the effect that the victim was in an alcohol blackout, stating that the victim was not unconscious at the time of the crime, but rather, the victim had memory lapses Whether it is possible to readily conclude, on the sole basis of fragmentary appearance of the victim, that the victim was an alcohol blackout and thus did not fall unconscious in the case where: (a) it was revealed that the victim had been in a state of abnormality to the point of suspecting unconsciousness in view of the circumstances objectively observed prior and subsequent to the facts of offense; or (b) in light of the relationship of the victim and the Defendant, assuming that the victim was in a normal condition, it is accepted that the victim was by no means expected to engage in a sexual act with the Defendant or even passively consent to sexual activity with the Defendant (negative)

Prev	Supreme Court Decision 2015Chu528 Decided February 4, 2021 【Revocation of Decision of Which Local Government Would Acquire Jurisdiction of the Portion of the Reclaimed Land in the Pyeongtaek-Dangjin Port】
Next	Supreme Court Decision 2017Meu12552 Decided February 4, 2021 【Divorce and Alimony, etc.】

list