However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

A copy (No. 1) of seized phrases shall be confiscated.

On May 4, 2018, the Defendant entered the Republic of Korea on May 4, 2018, and did not depart from the Republic of Korea even though the period of stay reaches August 2, 2018, and is engaged in illegal stay and marina business in the Republic of Korea until now.

At around 20:00 on March 29, 2020, the Defendant gave birth to a pregnant baby (math, 0 years of age) within the Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City B C, and between the infinite guest who has been a marina.

In such a case, the defendant, as a lineal ascendant, has a duty to take measures necessary for the survival of the victim, such as removing foreign substances, such as taking over the victim's cryp and the entrance, supplying nutritions, etc., and taking measures necessary for the survival of the victim, such as transferring the victim to the hospital when he discovers abnormal health symptoms.

Nevertheless, with the past experience in childbirth, the Defendant anticipated that he would not take such measures as above, but could not avoid the desire or take care of him, did not remove foreign substances or take the breast-feeding in the victim’s flag, and did not take the minimum measures necessary for the survival of the victim, such as stimulateing the victim, and did not take the necessary measures for the survival of the victim, and did not take such measures as reporting to the hospital or reporting to the 119th.

In this respect, the defendant, as a lineal ascendant, abandoned the victim for fear of not being able to conceal or bring up his desire as a lineal ascendant or for some other extenuating motive.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A report on internal investigation (including the attachment of a report on internal investigation, report on internal investigation (including the verification of the site), report on internal investigation (including the results of autopsy and the verification of the corpse), report on internal investigation (a report on the addition of a report on internal investigation) and report on internal investigation (a report on the addition of a report on external investigation), report on internal investigation (a report on the addition of a report on external investigation) (a report on internal investigation and photographs), report on internal investigation (a report on internal investigation and photographs, etc.), report on internal investigation (a report on the addition of a report on internal investigation), report on internal investigation (a report on the addition of a report on internal investigation), report on internal investigation (a report on the addition of a report on internal investigation and investigation), report on internal investigation (report on the addition of a report on internal investigation and investigation), report on internal investigation (report on the addition of a report on internal investigation and investigation), report on internal

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. On-site photographs, first on-site photographs, second on-site photographs (on-site photographs of a police hospital), third on-site photographs, fourth on-site photographs, and data CDs, such as field CCTVs, field CCTV images, and on-site photographs;

1. 112 reported case handling lists, physical list at the scene of change, examination results records, Handphone records, text messages, reports on the observation of autopsy in cases of change, notification of death of a consular institution, autopsy report, and report on the autopsy of a consular institution;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 275(1) (latter part) and 272 of the Criminal Act

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following grounds for sentencing has been repeatedly taken into consideration for favorable circumstances)

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

Judgment on the Defendant and defense counsel's argument

1. Summary of the assertion

At the time of the instant case, the Defendant took the minimum measures necessary for the survival of the victim. The Defendant did not neglect the victim, nor did he intended to neglect the victim.

2. Determination

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant committed an intentional act on the part of the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, by neglecting the victim to take the minimum measures necessary for the survival of the victim, etc., and by neglecting the victim at the time. Therefore, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s above assertion is not acceptable.

① The Defendant made a statement to the effect that he was pregnant with the victim on the day of birth at an investigative agency, and that he was unaware of the fact that he was pregnant before that day. However, prior to that case, the Defendant had already been pregnant in the Thailand. At that time, the Defendant had been aware of pregnancy in 2 months of pregnancy. The Defendant was born between 50 km and 65 km during the period of pregnancy. According to the autopsy, according to the result of the autopsy, the victim was presumed to have been born between 35 weeks and 40 weeks during the period of pregnancy. As the victim was presumed to have been born between 35 weeks in pregnancy. As alleged by the Defendant, even if the Defendant was born once more than seven months during the period of birth, it is difficult to view that the Defendant was unaware of the fact that he was pregnant until the time of birth of the victim. In light of the fact that the Defendant was pregnant before giving birth, the Defendant seems to have been aware of the fact that he was pregnant with the victim. Nevertheless, the Defendant did not prepare for birth.

② The Defendant, after having given birth to the victim, claimed that the victim took a minimum measure necessary for the victim’s survival, such as raising a large number of water on the floor to protect the body temperature, putting the victim on other hand, etc. However, the Defendant did not take such measures as breast-feeding or nutrition supply after having given birth to the victim. The Defendant concentrated on the victim’s clean-up of the closed-school toilet for a long time rather than taking measures for survival after giving birth. The Defendant, at around 22:0 to 23:00, 23:00, 222:00, and around 23:00, the Defendant considered that the victim died, without taking any measure, and the Defendant tried to kill the victim at the time of his/her death. However, it is difficult to view that the Defendant did not actively take such measures as “the police investigation” to the effect that he/she attempted to kill the victim. However, it is difficult to view that the Defendant did not actively take the necessary measures at the time of his/her death.

③ The Defendant asserts to the effect that he could not request assistance from the owner of a marina business establishment in Korea, and that he could not move to the hospital because he could not help the owner of the business. However, the Defendant appears to have been able to have been able to communicate with the hospital in English (the Defendant stated that the Defendant could not have been able to communicate with the hospital in English at the time of his refusal to appear at the prosecutor’s office on the ground of absence). The Defendant made contact with 1,000 persons including Korean and Thailand through “the Republic of Korea” or “the Republic of Korea,” and the Defendant’s cell phone was stored with the contact point of the above 1,00 persons, and thus, the Defendant could not have been able to move to the hospital with the help of the owner of the taxi article or mobile phone at the time of the instant case. In fact, the Defendant did not appear to have been able to request the police investigation agency to help the victim to move to the hospital in light of the fact that the Defendant could not request the victim’s status from the hospital.

④ In light of the fact that the Defendant appears to have been pregnant and given birth to the victim between the infertility guest who had been a marina, and that at the time of the instant case, the Defendant had been engaged in marina business in Korea as an illegal sojournr status at the time of the instant case, and it appears that it was practically difficult for the Defendant to rear the victim in Korea if he gives birth to the victim, and that it is difficult to find out the reason why the Defendant did not take any measures to the minimum degree necessary for the survival of the victim at the time of the instant case. In light of the above, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant caused the death of the victim by abandoning the victim as a lineal ascendant by neglecting the victim’s fear or by taking special account of the likelihood of not being able to conceal or bring up the

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months to 15 years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

【Determination of Punishment】

Arrest, confinement, abandonment, or abuse. 02. Abandonment and abuse; c. In the event of death, [Type 1] abandonment and abuse

【Special Convicted Person】

【Recommendation Area and Scope of Recommendations】

Above 4 years of imprisonment, 2 years of age

【General Convicts】

- Mitigation elements: No history of criminal punishment;

3. Determination of sentence;

In this case, the defendant did not take a minimum post-employment measure against a child who is a baby immediately after childbirth, and the victim died because the victim did not bring about an opportunity to live due to the defendant's crime, and the result of the crime is not easy.

However, the defendant, who was engaged in marina business in Korea as an illegal aliens, seems to have failed to actively request assistance because he/she concerns that the status of the illegal aliens might be inferred in Korea if he/she is discovered, and the defendant himself/herself seems to have suffered a considerable physical and mental shock after the case, and the fact that the defendant has no criminal history in Korea is considered as favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and result of the crime, various sentencing factors as shown in the arguments in the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.

Judge Lee Jong-hoon

Judges Mung-chan