If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

1. On July 5, 2015, the Defendant discovered the victim E (the 34 years of age) in front of the D in Ansan-si, A around 15:20 on July 5, 2015, the Defendant stated that he was the victim, with his own left hand, and that he was only her woman, and that he was only her her amb,” but it does not seem that he was the competent person even in case of part 00:37 of the file stored in CCTV at the scene of the crime. As such, the Defendant recognized the criminal facts.

The victims were forced to commit indecent acts.

2. The Defendant expressed the victim’s desire to engage in indecent conduct as stated in paragraph 1 at the time and place, and assaulted the victim by forcing the victim’s grandchildren on several occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. A E-document;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of CCTV video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes to the crime scene;

1. Relevant Article 298 of the Criminal Act, Article 260 of the Criminal Act, Article 260 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of each fine for a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed to Order;

1. The CCTV image CD at the scene of the crime regarding the assertion that it was not an indecent act under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was recorded at the time of the instant crime. According to the part 00:37 of the file 20150706-102543. 00:37 of the file stored in the said CD, it is confirmed that the Defendant was plucking out of the victim’s rear side while the Defendant plucked out of the victim’s rear side, and it goes beyond the scope of ordinary movements, and thus, it appears that the Defendant intentionally embarked the victim’s son while leaving the victim’s son, and thus, the victim intentionally displayed his son’s son. Accordingly, it is recognized that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim.

Therefore, the defendant and the defense counsel are different.