Motivación en las sentencias emitidas por los jueces de primer nivel en Ecuador

Abstract

Abstract: This thesis analyzes the reasoning behind the judgment issued in Case No. 16571-2025-XXXXX by the Judicial Unit for Violence against Women or Family Members in Pastaza, concerning a misdemeanor involving violence against women or family members. The study examines whether the judicial decision meets the standards for sufficient and correct reasoning, in accordance with the Constitution of Ecuador, the Comprehensive Organic Penal Code, and constitutional case law. The judgment acquitted the accused due to a lack of sufficient evidence to establish the material existence of the offense and criminal liability, applying the principles of the presumption of innocence and *in dubio pro reo*. Nevertheless, protective measures were granted to the alleged victim, in light of the State's duty regarding prevention and protection. The research employs a qualitative, descriptive, and analytical methodology aimed at identifying the argumentative structure, the *ratio decidendi*, the *obiter dicta*, and the adequacy of the judicial reasoning.