“A 1-year-old child who was trying to sleep was grabbed by the head, shaken, and hit with the palm of his hand.”

A daycare teacher in his 40s who emotionally and physically abused a one-year-old child several times was sentenced to prison in the second trial.

The Chuncheon District Court Criminal 메이저놀이터Division 2 (Chief Judge Lee Young-jin) sentenced child care teacher A (44), who was indicted on charges of aggravated child abuse by workers at child welfare facilities under the Child Abuse Punishment Act, to 8 months in prison and 2 years of probation, the same as the original trial. It was announced on the 9th.

The lower court upheld the sentence of a fine of 2 million won to B (58), the director of the daycare center, who was also brought to trial on charges of violating the Child Welfare Act.

Mr. A was brought to trial on charges of emotionally and physically abusing Mr. C (1) on 27 occasions at a daycare center in Wonju in September of last year, and Mr. B was put on trial on charges of failing to fulfill his supervisory duties.

As a result of the investigation, Mr. A abused Mr. C, which was detrimental to his mental health and development, such as feeding him an excessive amount of food to the point that his head was tilted back and pulling his arm so hard that he woke up while he was sleeping.

He also grabbed Mr. C’s head while he was trying to sleep and shook it or hit him with his palm.

The Wonju Branch of the Chuncheon District Court, which was in charge of the first trial, said, “It appears that the pain suffered by the child victims and their parents must have been considerable, and a petition for severe punishment was also submitted to the investigative agency by the father of the victim child.” He sentenced Mr. A to prison and sentenced him to 40 hours of child abuse as a repeat offender. He was ordered to attend preventive classes and restricted from working at children-related institutions for three years, and Mr. B was also sentenced to a fine.

The appellate court, which looked at the prosecution’s argument that the sentence was ‘light’, said, “Most of the circumstances that the prosecutor claimed as elements of sentencing in the original trial were revealed during the argument in the original trial, and no significant changes were made to the sentencing conditions and sentencing guidelines after the original trial’s decision was pronounced.” He dismissed it, saying, “I can’t find it.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *