Rape by Relationship)

Law Firm (LLC)

Attorney Dog-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

The defendant shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

1. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape in Relatives);

The defendant is a member of the "C" church in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and a member of the "C" church in Seocho-gu and the non-party of the victim D (the age of 41), and E is a person who is living together with the victim with the male family of the victim.

On April 25, 2017, the defendant called "a speech to be locked to the victim", and met the victim before the victim's house located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, and entered the house and entered the house of the victim.

While the Defendant was dividing a conversation with the victim, the Defendant: (a) entered the boiler with the victim; (b) laid the victim’s inside, and boomed the victim’s own bed; (c) put the victim’s fingers and panty ties listed above the victim’s body into the victim’s body; and (d) tried to have sexual intercourse with the victim by talking the victim’s body; (b) the victim resisted the victim by resisting the victim; (c) the victim requested the male-friendly E to assist with sound while resisting the victim; and (d) the Defendant did not have sexual intercourse with the boiler, which was hidden in the boiler room in order to avoid living with the victim. Accordingly, the Defendant attempted to rape a relative victim and attempted to commit rape.

2. An accusation;

After committing the crime of paragraph (1) above, the defendant was called D's home and moved out of D's house. The defendant was called "I Ha kne kel kel kel kel kel kel kel kel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel knel kn. The defendant tried to run the case with D's personal relatives and let D reach an agreement with him, but the defendant filed a complaint with the Seocho-gu Police Station on May 23, 2017. The defendant did not want to commit violence to the defendant's body and knish knish knish knish knish knish knish knish knish knish knish knish knish."

Around 15:00 on July 14, 2017, the Defendant submitted a written complaint stating that, although there was no fact that he had a staff member in charge of Egyptian office in the public service center of the Seoul Central Public Prosecutor's Office located in the Seocho-gu Seoul Central Public Prosecutor's Office intended to rape D on April 25, 2017, the Defendant filed a false complaint for rape with the intent of committing criminal punishment in collusion with D and D, and (2) on August 3 of the same year, the public service center of Egyptian office of Egyptian office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of Egyptian office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of the public prosecutor's office of this year forced the staff member to take a attitude leading to attempted rape of detention in the above public prosecutor's office of the prosecution.

On August 10, 2017, from around 13:55 to 17:32 of the same day, the Defendant continued to undergo an investigation in the Seocho Police Station located in Seocho-gu Seoul and in the capacity of the complainant at the office of economic and four teams in Seocho-gu, and made a statement to the same effect as the above accusation.

However, on April 25, 2017, the defendant attempted to rape D and attempted to commit so on the wind, but did not cause D and E to go against the defendant by threatening the defendant, and did not cause D and E to go to a different apology from the facts. The video images taken by the defendant's death were only the materials produced in a genuine manner, but not the evidence produced in an in personamly. Accordingly, the defendant and E were dismissed for the purpose of having D and E punished criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H in part;

1. The first written statement against the defendant in part of the interrogation protocol of the prosecution;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The police statement of the defendant;

1. Each prosecutor's statement concerning D and E;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol of D or E;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. One micro- SDR / One video-recording DDR 1 copy;

1. The I letter of text message (defendant -G) attached to the I letter of summary summary, the document No. 6 No. 1 copy of the photograph, the name of the suspect, one photo of the SP screen to be cut, the name of the victim, and one photo of the SP screen sent and taken between the victim and his/her child, the currency Ma1D/H, the currency Ma2D/E/Defendant, and the defense counsel’s check (Evidence No. 46);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint (Evidence Nos. 30) and an additional complaint (Evidence No. 43);

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 15 and 5(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the attempted rape by blood relation) and Article 156 of the Criminal Act (the occupation of an accusation and the choice of imprisonment)

1. Attempted mitigation;

Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (limited to attempted crimes, and violations of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (limited to rape in relation of relatives))

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act / [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes with Severe Punishment (Rape in Relatives)]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

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

1. Order to complete programs;

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

1. Exemption from an order for disclosure and notification;

In full view of Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, 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 fact that there is no history of criminal punishment against a sexual crime by the defendant, the registration of personal information of the defendant against the defendant, and the completion of a sexual assault treatment program, the defendant's age, occupation, occupation, family relationship, social relationship, the details and circumstances of the instant crime, other benefits expected by the disclosure or notification order, the effect of preventing the crime, and the adverse and anticipated side effects, it is determined that there are special circumstances where the disclosure or notification of the defendant's personal information may not be made).

1. Exemption from an employment restriction order;

In light of Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by January 16, 2018) and the proviso to Article 56(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the fact that there is no record that the defendant was punished for a sex offense), it is difficult to readily conclude that the defendant and his/her defense counsel have access to a sex offender by using their occupation and position or easy prevention of sex offenses, or the risk of recidivism is likely to occur. In addition, in light of the defendant's age, family environment, and employment restriction order, the disadvantage of the defendant and the effect of preventing sex crimes that may be achieved by such order, etc., the determination of the defendant's assertion about the defendant and his/her defense counsel

1. Determination on admissibility of evidence

The defendant's defense counsel asserts that the video files recorded in one MicroSD Card (Evidence No. 18) are inadmissible. And according to the statements of the defense counsel during the fourth trial, the defense counsel's assertion about the absence of admissibility of evidence is that there is no objection as to the identity and integrity of the files stored in the E mobile phone and the files submitted as evidence, but there is a possibility that they were already operated before they are submitted.

However, a private person, who is the voluntary production of evidence, does not have the duty to store and keep a video file in the same state as the original, and the defense counsel's above assertion merely constitutes the purport of raising questions as to the value of evidence or credibility of the video file, and cannot be viewed as denying the admissibility of evidence by itself. In addition, even if according to the result of the examination of evidence by this court, parts of the video file submitted by the defendant, D, and E, which appeared in the video, are not fabricated. The defense counsel's above assertion cannot be accepted.

A. Summary of the argument

The defendant has lost his mind due to the symptoms of a sick person, and only left the victim, had no attempted to rape the victim, and therefore, had false contents about the victim and E.

There is no false fact.

B. Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, since the victim’s statement has credibility beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant attempted to rape with the victim due to sufficient assault to suppress the victim’s resistance, and the defendant made a false accusation against the crime of attempted rape with the victim and E. Therefore, the defendant’s assertion is rejected.

1) The credibility of the victim’s statement

A) The victim, from the police to this court, had the victim enter the victim's house, followed the victim's house, followed the victim's house, and her talked about inconvenience with male and sex, and went to the bed room, and the victim also went to the bed room according to the defendant. The defendant she was tightly pushed the victim's body and forced the victim into the victim's body and forced the victim's body, so the victim could not escape from leaving the bed by her hand while her head head was forced. The defendant stated in a consistent statement that "the moment she was fluened by her hand," "the time she was fluened by her hands," and "E was stopped by her great sound."

On the other hand, it seems that there is a difference of expression about how or not the defendant made clothes, but it is consistent with the victim's statement in that the defendant's intent that he was partially off his clothes in the process of putting his hand in his inner clothes is consistent and there is a difference in the specific description of the situation while the situation is consistent about the situation of the victim's situation while the defendant entices the victim into the bedroom.

나) 피해자는 피고인이 와인을 달라고 한 뒤 '내가 와인 먹자고 해서 좀 이상하게 생각이 들지? 괜찮아, 나도 이런 사람이야'라고 말하면서 와인 병을 땄다고 진술하였고, 피고인이 피해자의 집에서 1시간 가까이 '혼자 지내는데 남자친구는 없느냐', '남자 만나본 적이 있느냐', '욕구가 생기면 어떻게 해결을 하냐', '너는 성녀겠다', '어떻게 그런 생각이 안 드냐', '혼자 사는 게 편하지', '너 어렸을 때 알몸을 본 사람은 내가 첫 남자일 거다', '예쁘다'는 등 말을 하였다고 진술하였으며, 피고인이 이 사건 범행 직후 피해자에게 '믿고 간다'는 말을 남겼다고도 진술하는 등 직접 경험하지 않고는 알기 어려운 매우 구체적인 내용을 진술하고 있다.

C) E was in the police’s house from the victim’s house to this court, and the victim’s three villages entered the house, and later the victim’s three villages entered the house, and was concealed in the multi-use room. However, at the time of 30 minutes after the victim’s multiple voice, the victim 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's '',' and 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's ' and her 's 's 's 's herss 's '.

The defendant and defense counsel stated that the victim had arranged the clothes, and they cannot witness the unsworn clothes and the appearance of the victim's strawing, so E's statement is inconsistent with the victim's statement. However, the prosecutor also stated in the prosecutor's office that the victim scam and pantyty in the state where the victim scam and panty were able to scam back (No. 61170 of the investigation record) and scams in the process of putting the knick and scam scams into the knick, and it cannot be viewed as contradiction that the victim scams and scam scamscam hyming in the process of putting the knick and panty scams into the knick. Furthermore, considering the fact that the victim scam in the multi-use room after several sounds, it cannot be viewed that the defendant and the victim were scamd merely because it was hidden.

In addition, even if the relationship between E and the victim, or the process of submitting evidentiary materials after the complaint and the submission of this case, some facts are different from the facts, it does not seem to be the degree of suspecting the credibility of the statement concerning the crime of this case by E and the victim.

D) From the video (around 2017, No. 61170, No. 109, 193 of the Investigation Record) taken immediately after the crime of rape in this case, E, the victim did not want to have the victim like the defendant by communicating with Handphones to contact the victim's mother with the victim's mother. If the victim knows this fact, the victim's mother will return to the victim's mother by shock. It does not appear that the victim was tending. The victim's appearance immediately after this case is consistent with the situation in which the victim and E make statements.

E) Until the instant case occurs, the victim was her mother and her her her son, and was living a religious life with his her her her son for not less than 20 years, and only her son was her son and her son. At the time of the instant case, her son and her son were aware of the her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.

On the other hand, it is not reasonable to view that the victim was absent from the defendant, even though he did not have any person living together with the victim in his family or ‘C' council members other than the defendant, and the victim was living together with the defendant, and therefore, the victim was absent from the defendant in order to conceal the defendant's living together with E. In addition, it is not reasonable to deem that the victim was unaware of the victim's opinion that the victim would consent to agree with the public defender of the victim at around June 20, 2017 with the agreement amount of KRW 1 billion. However, the victim stated that he would not refuse to receive the agreement from the defendant and would not agree (35 pages of the record of the examination of the witness D), and that the victim was forced to agree with the relative and the church of this case, and his family members were forced, and that the victim did not have any motive to receive the victim's economic power and social status, and that the victim did not agree with the defendant in this case.

With respect to the part suspected of the reasonableness of the victim's statement

F) The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that, while the Defendant is closely attached to the victim in a narrow bed room, the victim’s be pushed ahead of the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the margin on the bed. However, the part of the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s bet the victim’s statement

G) The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that the Defendant did not refuse the Defendant to go on his house at the time near the victim’s own time. If the Defendant had obscene talks with a volume of one hour, then the victim would have to express his intent to refuse to enter the bedroom. However, the victim had a long-standing relationship with the Defendant, and had talked about the Defendant’s house at the latest time, and it was the victim’s first going through as the victim’s personality and behavior. Therefore, it appears that the Defendant had no choice but to believe the Defendant on the basis of the Defendant’s personality and behavior known to him, and it was difficult to view that the Defendant had the intent to have sexual intercourse.

H) Even if the victim satisfyed the Defendant’s shoulder, it does not seem that there is no superior position against the Defendant even when the victim satisfyed the Defendant’s shoulder, and the victim’s resistance itself cannot be a circumstance to suspect the victim’s sexual intercourse between 2 and 3 minutes. Although the victim resists the Defendant’s sexual intercourse between 2 and 3 minutes, it is difficult to obtain the victim’s right to help immediately E. However, considering that the situation where the Defendant’s satisfying against the victim is extremely difficult, it cannot be said that the victim’s right to satisfy, once satfy and down the Defendant’s satisfy so that it would be difficult to escape from the Defendant’s ability to satisfy. Furthermore, considering that the victim’s satisfying did not tear the Defendant’s physical force, it cannot be objectively denied the victim’s credibility of the victim’s self-s structure by investigating the type of force itself.

(j) The victim stated in the police that there was a case where the victim had been driving away from the church believers by selling the limit of the past credit to a woman with a mind by keeping the past credit, but the principal purpose of the victim's above statement is to protect the victim's body because the church's sexuality is likely to be found in the house, and it cannot be suspected that the victim intended to gather the defendant.

(k) The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that, from April 27, 2017, the victim’s movement from April 27, 2017, following the day after the instant case occurred, and that, in liaison with the Defendant’s wife, it would go against the general appearance of the victim of sexual assault who suffered mental impulse. However, there is no empirical rule that it is impossible for the victim of sexual assault to carry out daily activities like usual lives at ordinary times when traveling or coming out of the outside. Moreover, the statement that the victim’s house was in close distance to the Defendant’s house, which determined that the victim’s house would be consistent with the initial scheduled trip. Considering the victim’s social experience and age, it cannot be said that the victim’s act that the victim took place to his relatives without being different from that of the Defendant’s house cannot be understood as an act that is difficult to see the other’s relatives under the concealment of the damage of this case.

2) Whether there is an assault to such an extent as to make it considerably difficult to resist.

In order to establish the crime of rape, the perpetrator’s assault and intimidation must be such as to make it impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim. Whether the assault and intimidation were to make it impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim’s resistance should be determined based on the specific circumstances at the time when the victim was placed, comprehensively taking into account not only the content and degree of the assault and intimidation, but also the circumstances such as the developments leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances at the time of the act and the subsequent circumstances. From an ex post perspective, it should not be readily concluded that the perpetrator’s assault and intimidation did not reach the extent that the victim’s resistance was significantly difficult solely on the ground that the victim was able to escape from the scene of the crime or the victim did not resist due to his/her personal force (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do5979, Jan. 25, 2007; 2017Do21249, Feb. 28, 2018).

As seen above, even though the Defendant: (a) forced the victim to her body and her body, and her body was frightened by the victim, and her body was frightened, the Defendant her body was frightened and her body was frightened; (b) however, the Defendant her body was frightened with the victim’s clothes. The Defendant was frightend with the victim’s body; (c) the Defendant was frightened with the victim’s her body; and (d) the Defendant was frightd with the victim’s her body; and (d) the Defendant’s failure to do so was due to the Defendant’s unexpected third party, it can be recognized that the Defendant exercised assault to the extent

3) Whether the defendant's assertion is reasonable

A) The Defendant argued that the victim was the victim who had been living in the Defendant, and that the victim was her driver on the ground that the victim did not have a vehicle.

However, in light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant visited the victim’s house late at night using the victim’s external third village and the status in which it is difficult for the victim to refuse the request of the Defendant. The victim first sees that the Defendant had contact with the inside of the inside, and that the Defendant had arrived at whether he/she arrived at the home, and that he/she had been asked. He/she should be punished. He/she has been asked to see. 4. he/she has been asked to do so, and that he/she has sent the victim a message that the Defendant would cut off again at around April 23:47, 2017. Since the victim was in a house with the outside of the victim at the time, and the existence of E was concealed to his/her family members, it is difficult to understand that the Defendant was able to easily see that the Defendant was able to have his/her own house and her own house, and that it was difficult to see that the Defendant was able to have his/her own house and her own house, even if he/she had talked.

나) 피고인은 피해자와 대화하다가 토할 것 같은 메스꺼움을 느껴 일어나서 가려고 하였으나, 순간 실신하여 쓰러지면서 피해자를 붙잡고 거실에 있는 매트 위로 넘어졌는데, 그때 피해자가 갑자기 '오빠, 오빠'하고 외치자 E이 나와 자신의 멱살을 잡으며 '삼촌이 조카한테 뭐 하는 짓이냐'고 윽박질렀고, 당황스러움, 어지러움, 메스꺼 움 등으로 '미안하다', '난 간다' 하고 집에 돌아간 것이라고 주장한다. 피고인이 제출한 자료들에 의하면 피고인이 이 사건 있기 전부터 현기증을 느끼며 수 초간 의식을 잃는 실신 증상을 겪은 것은 인정된다. 그러나 1년에 2 ~ 3회 정도 발생하던 실신 증상이 하필 피고인이 자진하여 자정 넘은 시간에 피해자의 집에 찾아가 와인을 마시며 남자에 관한 이야기를 했을 때 발생하였고, 피해자와 E이 모두 피고인이 정신을 잃고 쓰러지는 것을 피해자를 강간하려는 것으로 오해하였으며, 이에 대해 피고인은 아무런 해명도 하지 못한 채 사과만 하였다는 것은 우연이 겹쳤다고 보기에도 지나치게 이례적이어서 추상적인 가능성을 인정하기도 어렵다.

그리고 피고인은 최초 경찰 진술 당시 실신을 하였다는 점은 언급하지 않고 갑자기 어질해서 '□□아'라고 하면서 넘어졌다고만 진술하였으며, 피해자가 '오빠, 오빠' 하였을 때 황당해서 '삼촌한테 왜 오빠라고 하나?'라는 이상한 생각을 하는 순간, 방에서 웬 남자가 툭 나왔다고 진술하여(수사기록 2017형제61170호 95쪽) 피해자가 E을 부르는 순간과 E이 등장한 순간을 연속적으로 기억하고 진술하였음에도, 이후 검찰에서는 피해자의 '오빠' 소리를 들은 후 잠시 정신을 잃었다고 하며, 얘가 왜 삼촌에게 오빠라고 그러나'라는 생각을 했던 게 생각이 나고 정신을 차려보니 모르는 남자가 빈사 상태로 쓰러진 자신의 멱살을 쥐고 있었다고 진술함으로써(수사기록 2017형제61170호 449쪽) 주요한 변소 내용을 변경하였고, 자신에게 실신 증상이 있음을 알았던 피고인이 정신을 잃었다는 사실조차 몰랐다는 것은 쉽사리 납득할 수 없다.

C) As to the circumstances in which the Defendant returned to the victim’s home and returned to the victim’s home, the Defendant: (a) sent back to the victim’s home; (b) but, inasmuch as the Defendant got out of the house two times; (c) sent back to the victim’s home at around 01:10 to dialogue with the victim and come back to the victim’s home; (d) E had threatened the Defendant, forced him to knee, knee, knee, without good physical condition; and (e) took advantage of the victim’s mind that he would die without being able to die.

However, it is difficult to view the Defendant’s appearance contained in the film taken by E as being in a mixed state after the truth. The Defendant continued to commit a crime despite having been aware of the Defendant’s recording and video recording of oneself. However, it is difficult to understand that a person without fault committed an act of causing any evidence that can be a weak point only by means of fear and reduction of fear, and in view of the victim’s appearance appearing in the video, it cannot be said that the Defendant’s crime of death committed against the victim at the time is a threat of E solely.

D) Even after the victim’s complaint was collected, the Defendant sent a 7th century message to the effect that it covers the victim. It is difficult to see that the message was sent by a person who does not recognize his or her mistake. The Defendant would be crossed off, but it would be 0:48 on the same day. The Defendant would be 5th day of 00,000 and 8th day of 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000:00,000,000:0,000,000:00,000,000,000:0,000,000,000,000:0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

마) 피고인은 이 사건이 있은 바로 다음 날인 2017. 4. 27. 이 사건 범행 사실을 전혀 모르고 있던 피해자의 모친에게 '피고인이 피해자를 힘들게 한 일이 있는데, 피해자의 모친은 모르는 게 낫다고, 피해자에게 절대 말하지 말라고 하면서 피해자의 모친에게 미안하다'고 말하였는데, 피고인이 단지 피해자와 E을 달랠 의사뿐이었다면 굳이 피해자의 모친에게 자신의 잘못을 암시하는 이야기를 할 이유가 없다.

F) Even during the statement made by the Defendant on June 11, 2017 by phone to the victim, it includes the content that the Defendant could have seen that H had left the crime of this case. It is difficult for H to easily understand that H had made the following specific statements without talking about the crime. H has to do so in the above currency: “I Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol?? I Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol ? I Dol Dol Dol Dol ? this Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol ? this Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol 6? Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol Dol, so far after Dol Dol Dol Dol.

G) On June 11, 2017, the day following H 2017, the Defendant: (a) on June 12, 2017, on which H 1 sought to return to the victim, “it shall be so far as O, CO, and CO, was seriously dead, and shall be released from this title.” (b) On the part of the victim, the Defendant himself/herself was flick, but he/she may have flicked, but he/she was flick, so he/she may have flicked, so he/she would have flicked, so that he/she would have flicked the victim, and he/she would have flicked his/her flick, so that he/she would have flicked his/her flick, so that he/she would have flicked his/her flick, and that he/she would have flicked his/her flick.

H) As seen earlier, even after the victim became aware of the fact that the victim filed a complaint from the day immediately after the instant case, the Defendant requested the victim to commit the crime of death directly or through the mother of the victim and H. However, the Defendant’s attorney-at-law appointed at the time of June 20, 2018 that the victim demanded one billion won of the agreed amount, and subsequently, the Defendant was investigated as the first suspect on June 26, 2016 and denied the instant crime. In light of the fact that the Defendant actively defended the victim, such as denying the crime from the time when the possibility of the Defendant’s agreement with the victim ceases to exist and filing a complaint against the victim and E, the mere fact that the Defendant was of a nature that the victim was dead as a member of the Council or that the Defendant tried to resolve the dispute smoothly with others cannot be deemed as having no authenticity.

1. Reasons for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and September 1 to March 11;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Sentencing does not apply to an attempted rape in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes;

(b) An accusation;

[Determination of type] Type 1 (General Dismissal)

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment from 6 months to 2 years (Basic Area). The final scope of sentence in accordance with the Guidelines for Handling Multiple Offenses

3. The crime of rape in this case is committed by the Defendant’s external relationship with the victim and the church member with which the victim had a religious life for not less than 20 years, even though he/she had sexual intercourse with the victim using a special trust relationship with the victim. The crime of this case was committed by the victim, the victim was seriously suffering from severe psychological shock and pain, and the trust relationship between the victim and the family members of the victim was destroyed, and the victim was destroyed, and the victim and his/her relative members were suffering from pain and pain. The Defendant committed the crime of this case by changing the attitude of the victim’s intent not to agree with the victim without any agreement, while the lower limit of the scope of sentencing is lower than the statutory applicable applicable sentences under the sentencing guidelines.

However, the degree of assault committed by the defendant by the victim is not only a significant letter, but also sexual intercourse was committed without reaching the degree of serious indecent acts. The defendant was the first offender, and for 25 years, led the church without a big problem as a member of the church. In addition, the defendant's age, health, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime of this case, and the circumstances of the crime of this case, etc. shall be determined by taking into account various sentencing conditions in the records of this case, including the defendant's age, health, character

Registration of Personal Information

In the case of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (where a conviction against a crime of rape committed in relation to relatives becomes final and conclusive, the defendant constitutes a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act. The period of registration of personal information of the defendant is 15 years pursuant to Article 45 (1) 3 and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which causes the registration of personal information, in full view of the crimes of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape in relation to relatives) and the crimes of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes which cause the registration of personal information, the period of registration of personal information should not be reduced, and thus

Judges Kim Gin-young

Judges, Senior Jins