However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of imprisonment for the accused.

At around 18:00 on July 1, 2013, the Defendant: (a) taken a bath in the “D” Ma, a body of the victim E (Nam, 7 years old); (b) taken the body of the victim E, who was taking a bath in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si; (c) taken care of the body of the victim E (Seoul, 7 years old); and (d) sought to refuse the victim’s sexual organ and bring the victim into clothes; and (d) took care of the victim’s body, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim, who was a child, by taking the victim’s sexual organ into custody, with the Defendant’s hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding E;

1. Application of the video-recording statutes;

1. Article 7 (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, and Article 298 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances among the grounds for the relevant punishment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution ( normal consideration of the reasons for the suspension of execution);

1. Article 21 (2) and (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. Article 47(1) and Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Exempted from Disclosure Orders and Notification Orders, the proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the defendant has no record of being punished for sexual crimes prior to the crime in this case). The defendant is judged to have the effect of preventing recidivism even by taking part in the registration of personal information and taking part in the treatment of sexual assault. Considering these circumstances, since the defendant's registration of personal information and taking part in the treatment of sexual assault, it is more likely that the defendant's personal information will not be disclosed and notified in this case, rather than the benefits and preventive effect expected by the disclosure order or notification order, there are special circumstances that the defendant would not receive any disadvantage. Accordingly, the defendant is not ordered to disclose and notify the personal information of the defendant.)