beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.15 2016고단2526

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant taken the body of the victims who may cause sexual humiliation and sense of sexual shame using the following cameras, etc. against their will:

1. On March 22, 2016, at around 15:45, the Defendant found the name influorial victim who was short of the size of the E store located on the first floor of Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-gu, Seoul, for a period of nine minutes, using S5 smartphones' camera functions in the victim’s gallone.

2. On March 23, 2016, around 13:01, the Defendant found a short-tested victim at the bus stops located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and taken video images for 2:36 seconds of the victim’s bridge by using the camera function of S5 Smartphones owned by the Defendant.

3. On March 23, 2016, at around 16:10, the Defendant discovered a false victim’s name influorial fluorial fluor in G station located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, for a period of 29 minutes, using the gallon function of S5 Smartphones to determine the victim’s bridge level when gluorial glusium owned by the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Records and photographs of seized articles;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Analysis of seized articles);

1. Article 14 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and Selection of fines for the crimes in question;

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

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order appears to be against the defendant's wrong recognition, and so far, the defendant is an initial offender who has no record of punishment.