준강간상해
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
The defendant shall be ordered to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.
Punishment of the crime
On August 7, 2013, at the same time as “E” in the name of “E” located in Yong-gu, Yong-gu, Yong-gu, Yong-gu, Yong-gu, and the Defendant, at around 21:30 on August 7, 2013, performed drinking together with the Victim F (F (F, 22 years of age) who was born to the university, and continuously, around August 8, 2013, the Defendant was willing to have sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the state in which the victim’s consciousness was unknown, who was killed in his mind under the influence of alcohol, and the victim’s consciousness was unknown.
At around 02:30 on August 8, 2013, the Defendant: (a) was under the influence of alcohol at the small room of the victim’s residence located in Yong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) was under the influence of alcohol; (c) was under the influence of alcohol; (d) was under the influence of the victim’s body by hand; and (e) was under the left hand in order to have sexual intercourse with the victim.
Accordingly, the victim's body is so sound as to read "ma" to the defendant, and the victim spawn the body of the defendant by hand and spawn the body of the defendant, and the defendant spawn the door, and the defendant spawn the door, and "I can escape how much." The victim spawn opened in governance, and the victim spawn opened a large window and went out of it.
Accordingly, while the Defendant tried to have sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s state of influence to resist, the prosecution instituted an indictment by inserting an expression of “influence” as to this part, but changed to “influence of the victim” according to the statement of opinion submitted after the prosecution was instituted. The above statement of opinion states that it is difficult to presume the specific act by inserting the finger influence as a single possibility in a case where the victim did not have a leluence.
As examined below, it is clear that the defendant's act causes the above injury to the victim, but it was a specific act.