2. A program for treating sexual assault for 40 hours against the accused.

At around 19:00 on March 7, 2014, the Defendant, in combination with the victim G (V, 19 years of age) who fested with the Defendant’s scam and drink. From around 22:00, “H” located in the same Dong (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) had continued to drink in the instant restaurant, and had access to the victim of the instant toilet (hereinafter “the instant toilet”).

The Defendant, at around 01:00 on March 8, 2014, had the victim under the influence of alcohol, and had sexual intercourse with the victim by inserting the clothes of the victim who was drunk from the above date to 06:00, under the influence of alcohol, and inserting the sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sound.

Accordingly, the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the state of mental or physical disability or impossibility.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G, J and K;

1. Partial statement of the witness L;

1. Part of the prosecutor's protocol of examination of the defendant

1. Part of the protocol of examination of each police suspect against the accused [including the statement part of victim G in the protocol of examination of suspect as evidence No. 17]

1. Each police statement made to J, K and victims G;

1. A complaint filed by the victim G;

1. Each investigation report (to attach, etc. CCTVs at He cafeterias, CCTVs at Iel, internal photographs of Iel);

1. Egresponding screens, parking CCTVs to caps, internal photographs of telecom, and H cafeterias;

1. The Kakao Stockholm messages and text messages of J and K on the screen;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on CCTV video files in a H restaurant;

1. Articles 299 and 297 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed to Order

1. Although the summary of the argument was the fact that the defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim at the time of the decision, the defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim at the instant telecom.