Special Violence, Confinement

The defendant shall be ordered to complete a program to prevent sexual traffic for 40 hours. The defendant shall be ordered to place employment restrictions on children and juveniles-related institutions, etc. for three years.The defendant shall be acquitted from being detained in the charge of this case.

【Criminal Power】

On June 2, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Jung-gu District Court on June 2, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 10, 2014 on June 3, 2014, and completed the execution of the sentence at that time. On May 25, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Central District Court for the same crime, etc. and became final and conclusive on February 28, 2018.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse against Victims B;

On November 2015, the Defendant committed sexual intercourse with the victim during about six hours from November 2015 to April 4-5 of the following day, and provided the victim with a cash of KRW 300,000 to purchase the sex of the child and juvenile. 2. On November 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) committed sexual intercourse with the victim during the period of approximately six hours in a guest room where the number of Doncheon-si Doncheon-si Mancheon-si was unknown; (b) provided the victim with a sexual intercourse, and (c) provided the victim with a cash of KRW 30,000.

In November 2015 to January 2016, the Defendant provided the victim with a sexual intercourse with the victim who was under 14 years of age and provided the victim with a cash of KRW 2.50,000 in return, at the guest room where it is impossible to know the number of Mamo-gun Evis-gun in Gyeonggi-do, 2015.

3. Special violence;

On November 2015, the Defendant, at the building parking lot located in Dong-gu, Doncheon-si, Doncheon-si, 2015, assaulted the victim by "H, etc., whose identity cannot be known for the reason that the victim G (the 18 years of age) had expressed the victim's desire to take part in B for a long time, such as the above, as in the above paragraph, on the ground that he expressed the victim's desire to take part in B, as a smartphone hosting," and assaulted the victim at one time in the front of the victim's head.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness B, D (alias), G, and I;

1. A detailed report on missing children, etc. profiling (B);

1. Previous convictions: The results of inquiry, investigation reports (suspect A, written judgments and written indictments), written judgments (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Ma7885, 7890), written judgments (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017No2067), written judgments and case detailed inquiries (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017No20586) and the application of statutes of the Supreme Court (2017Do20586);

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

Article 13(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the purchase of juvenile sex, the choice of imprisonment with labor), Articles 261 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of special violence and the choice of imprisonment with labor)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act [Article 35 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., which ends on June 2014]

1. Statutory mitigation;

Article 39(1) latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act [Consideration of equity in cases where a judgment is rendered concurrently with a crime of violation of the Act on the Interest of Narcotics, Etc., for which a judgment has become final and conclusive on February 28,

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

The latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act (mutual between the crimes in the market and the crimes in violation of the Narcotics Control Act, etc., for which judgment becomes final and conclusive on February 28, 2018)

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 resulting from a violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Victims D with the largest punishment and punishment for concurrent crimes prescribed by the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse]

1. Order to complete programs;

The main sentence of Article 21(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15452, Jan. 16, 2018); Article 56(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018)

Judgment on the Defendant and defense counsel's argument

1. As to the crime against the victim B in violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (sexual purchase, etc.)

A. The summary of the argument lies in the fact that the defendant had engaged in the act of purchasing the victim B's sex. However, when the defendant dialogues with the victim through the cryptization for purchasing sex, the victim himself/herself was 21 years of age and sent his/her photograph of the adult resident registration certificate, and even when the victim was in direct contact with the victim, the victim told him/her that he/she should engage in sexual traffic because there is no way to seek money after graduating from the high school, and there is no way to seek money. In addition, the victim's appearance could not be considered as a minor due to the maturity of the victim's mother. As such, the defendant did not know that the victim was a child or juvenile at the time.

B. Determination

According to the statements made by G in this Court, G may be recognized as the fact that “J” Do has opened a hosting room for sexual traffic by setting the victim’s age at 21 years (Article 11-12). However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and duly investigated by this court, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the victim B was a juvenile at least at the time, and it is difficult to deem that the Defendant believed the victim as an adult and that the victim was a juvenile. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

1) Around November 2015, the Defendant purchased the victim’s sex, the victim was merely the third grade student of the 15-year-old middle school. In light of the appearance, voice, attitudes, and horse speculation of the victim who attended this court as a witness, the Defendant appears to have been able to sufficiently see the fact that the victim was a juvenile. Furthermore, since the victim testified in this court on April 19, 2018 over two years from November 2015, the victim testified in this court on April 19, 2018, the Defendant appears to have easily known the fact that the victim was a juvenile at the time of November 2015.

2) While mediating the victim’s sexual traffic in this court, G made a statement that the victim’s appearance appears to have been mature than the age of the victim in this court, the victim did not seem to have been adult and that the victim was deemed to have reached the second-third-year high school (the second-class page of the examination of the witness). In addition, the prosecutor’s investigation, which is an intermediary, stated that the victim’s appearance appears to have been mature than the age of the victim in the second-year high school, while the victim stated in the prosecutor’s investigation that he was the external appearance of the high school, the victim was the victim’s appearance in the second-year high school, and that it would have been sufficiently doubtful from the point of view of considering that the victim’s appearance was the victim’s appearance in the second-year high school. If the victim’s sex purchase took place, the victim stated that “I would have been able to ask the victim’s identification card if he had been sexually purchased, it appears that the Defendant was well aware that he was sexually using sexual traffic (the 646th of the investigation record).

4) The photograph of the resident registration certificate that the defendant is sent by the victim is an adult person, but his name or face photograph is another woman who is not the victim. In addition, G does not have to send a photograph of the resident registration certificate to the defendant in this court, and the photograph of the resident registration certificate submitted by the defendant was first viewed as the resident registration certificate (the third page of the witness examination record). I also stated in the prosecutor's investigation that there is no photograph of the resident registration certificate submitted by the defendant and the woman of the resident registration certificate did not correspond to the victim (the 707 pages of the investigation record). It is doubtful about whether the defendant was sent a photograph of the actual resident registration certificate and confirmed it (D also stated that the defendant did not have an identification card (the 728 pages of the investigation record).

2. As to the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Victims against the victim D

A. Summary of the assertion

1) The date and time of the crime indicated in this part of the facts charged is not specified as much as the Defendant can exercise his right of defense.

2) The Defendant did not have purchased sex at the time and place of the crime indicated in this part of the facts charged.

B. Determination as to whether this part of the facts charged is specified

1) Relevant legal principles

The purport of the law that allows the court to specify the facts charged by specifying the date, time, place, and method of a crime is to limit the scope of trial against the court and to facilitate the exercise of its defense by specifying the scope of defense against the accused. Therefore, the facts charged is sufficient to include the aforementioned elements in the indictment to the extent that it can be distinguishable from other facts. Even if the date, time, place, method, etc. of a crime are not explicitly indicated in the indictment, if it is inevitable to indicate the general facts in light of the nature of the crime charged without going against the purport of the law that allows the specification of the facts charged, the indictment cannot be deemed unlawful because the contents of the indictment are not specified (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do12803, Dec. 12, 2013).

2) Determination

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of this case, namely, ① the date and time of the crime in this part of the facts charged was indicated as “the date and time of the crime was no longer than November, 2015 through January, 2016,” and the scope is somewhat wide. However, it is possible to distinguish the facts charged in this case from other facts because the place and the counterpart of the crime in this case, the price for the purchase of sex, etc. are specifically stated in the facts charged. ② Even if following the date and time of the crime in this part of the facts charged, there is no obstacle to double prosecution or the prescription of public prosecution. ③ The victim seems to be difficult to accurately memory the date and time of the crime by stating the damage at the time when 6 months or more from the time of the crime in this part of the facts charged, and ④ the defendant submitted the cell phone statement as evidence in this part of the facts charged, considering that it is difficult to view that the temporary entry in the facts charged in this case causes considerable hindrance to the defendant’s exercise of defense right.

In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the Defendant’s act of purchasing victim D’s sex at the time and place of the crime stated in this part of the facts constituting the crime can be acknowledged. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

1) At the time of the crime described in this part of the criminal facts from the investigative agency to the date of the crime in this court, the victim boardedd the Defendant’s vehicle to engage in commercial sex acts in the vicinity of the valley located in Gyeonggicheon-gun, with the Defendant, and went to Embel, which is the place where the Defendant committed the crime in this part of the criminal facts. At that point, the victim lost his mind by eating and drinking the same Chinese medicine as the Defendant’s Chinese medicine, and had sexual intercourse with the Defendant and received KRW 2.50,00 in return for commercial sex acts from the Defendant. The victim stated relatively consistently to the purport that he received KRW 2.50,00 in return for commercial sex acts. The victim stated the characteristics of the Defendant’s sexual organ

The victim cannot find out the motive or reason for false accusation of the defendant.

2) G stated in the investigative agency and this court that, in order to mediate sexual traffic consistently, the victim was sent to the male buyer, and then sent the victim first to the male buyer, and the victim was her getting on and off the Defendant’s vehicle, and the victim and the Defendant her talked through a mobile phone, and the victim got out from the Eel and lost his memory of the same herb drugs that the Defendant gave out from the Eel, and then the victim lost his memory.

3) The statement between the victim and G is inconsistent with the situation where the victim met the defendant in the vicinity of the valley, the time during which the victim met the defendant, and the situation and time during which the victim met G after departing from the Embel. However, the basic purport of the victim's boarding the defendant's vehicle for commercial sex acts and returning to the Embel after sending a considerable amount of time in that place is consistent with both the victim and G. In addition, the victim and G appears to have arranged commercial sex acts or commercial sex acts. In addition, where the victim and G made a statement of commercial sex acts in the past after the lapse of about five to seven months, the victim and G appear to have a large number of times of sexual sex acts, and each victim's memory is likely to differ. Accordingly, it is difficult to deny the credibility of the victim's statement solely on the above basis.

4) The victim stated in the investigative agency that there was no statement that there was the enemy who had sexual intercourse with the defendant in addition to the statement that he had sexual intercourse with the defendant as above. At around January of 2016, the defense counsel asked the defendant about whether there was the enemy of the defendant for sexual intercourse in the Yang-si, Yang-si, Yang-si, and the defendant again had the enemy but did not engage in sexual intercourse with the defendant. G also stated in the investigative agency that the victim had sexual intercoursed with the defendant after engaging in sexual intercourse with the defendant, and that there was the enemy who had returned to the victim's statement (the investigative record No. 375 of the investigation record). This conforms to the above statement by the victim.

5) According to the communication details of the Defendant’s cell phone (Investigation Records No. 790, 801-909). While the Defendant’s living base at the time of the instant case appears to be the same dubcheon, the Defendant’s living base was transmitted to the cell phone used by the Defendant around November 29, 2015.

6) Although the victim’s contact with G in the course of investigation and asked specific information about the difference of the Defendant, it cannot be readily concluded that G has exercised the influence over the victim to make a false statement due to such circumstance, and there is no other circumstance to acknowledge it.

3. As to the crime of special assault

A. Summary of the assertion

Although there is a fact that the defendant has taken the head of the victim G one time by drinking, there is no fact that the defendant has taken the head of the victim G into the camping net.

B. Determination

In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the fact that the Defendant committed assault against the Victim G by taking the victim’s head at one time due to the camping net, a dangerous object. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

1) 피해자는 수사기관 및 이 법정에서 일관하여 피고인이 2015년 11월경 동두천시 F에 있는 건물 지하주차장에서 야구방망이로 피해자의 머리를 약하게 툭 하고 1대 때 렸다고 진술하였고, I도 수사기관 및 이 법정에서 일관하여 위와 같은 취지로 진술하였다.

2) The victim made a statement that the victim had only one head from the defendant, and that there was no other assault or desire (as stated in the investigation record, 570 pages). The victim did not seem to have distortedly made a statement about the damage of the victim, and the defendant acknowledged the fact that the head of the victim was 1 to 2 times by drinking. The victim seems to have no reason to make a false statement about the part of the camping net.

3) 피해자와 I의 진술이 피고인을 만난 경위와 장소, 피고인이 야구방망이를 가져온 방법과 야구방망이의 재질 등에 있어서 불일치하는 부분이 있기는 하다. 그러나 피고인이 야구방망이로 피해자의 머리를 툭 하고 1대 때렸다는 기본적인 취지는 일관되어 있고, 피해일로부터 약 7개월 정도 시간이 지난 이후 피해 사실을 진술하는 상황에서 범행 전후의 세세한 부분에 관하여는 기억이 흐려지거나 부정확할 수 있으므로, 각자 기억이 서로 다를 가능성이 충분히 있다고 보인다. 따라서 위와 같은 사정만으로 피해자 진술의 신빙성을 부정하기는 어렵다.

1. The grounds for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months from 15 years;

2. Reference to the sentencing criteria;

The sentencing guidelines are not applied to each crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) and other concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. However, the sentencing guidelines are presented as reference to the sentencing guidelines for the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (fence) with heavier punishment.

[Determination of Types] The Act of Purchasing the sex of children and juveniles under the age of 19 shall be the act of purchasing the sex of children and juveniles under the age of 19. The act of purchasing the sex of children and juveniles

【Special Convicted Person】

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, Imprisonment from October to June 2

3. Determination of sentence;

The following circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and result of the crime, and various sentencing factors specified in the arguments in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as the order.

○ Unfavorable Circumstances: Each of the instant crimes of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (sexual purchase, etc.) purchased the sex of juveniles who did not fully establish the awareness of sexuality and lack the ability to determine, and such crimes are not good in that they adversely affect the establishment of sound sexual values of juveniles as well as the establishment of sound sexual culture in our society. Furthermore, the Defendant committed a crime of assaulting the victim G with dangerous objects, which is more likely to be subject to criticism. On the other hand, the Defendant not only has the history of criminal punishment on several occasions, but also repeated the crime without being aware of it during the period of repeated offense.

The circumstances favorable to ○○: The Defendant purchased the victim B’s sex, recognized the fact that the Defendant abused the victim G with his hand, and took an attitude towards reflecting it. In the case of the instant special assault crime, the degree of exercise of force or the degree of damage is insignificant, and the victim G, who is the victim, also wants the above victim to render the maximum disposition. In addition, since each of the instant crimes is in the concurrent relationship between the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which is a sex offense subject to registration and submission of personal information, the Defendant is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

Meanwhile, with respect to the defendant, a sex crime which causes the registration of personal information under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and other crimes are concurrent pursuant to Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the punishment is determined pursuant to Article 38 of the Criminal Act. The period for registering personal information resulting therefrom is 15 years pursuant to Article 45(1)3 and (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes. However, in full view of the nature of each of the crimes in this case and the severity of the crimes, it is not recognized that the period for registering personal information of the defendant is unreasonable, and therefore,

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

around November 2015, the Defendant, at the location described in Paragraph (1) of the crime, 2015, allowed the victim B to sleep drugs, and prevented the victim from using a mobile phone in order to communicate with I and G, which is the franchising book, and prevented the victim from drinking and drinking out on the body of the Defendant, and detained the victim for about six hours from about four to five p.m. on the following day.

2. Summary of the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion

Under the consent of the victim B, the defendant was only her pregnant with the victim. In other words, it is difficult for the victim to her influencing so that the victim was unable to sleep, so that the defendant was allowed to do so by stating that it would be a short-term and hidden one, and the time has increased, and the victim was given more money to the victim as much as the time has increased (the price of ever sexual traffic was 150,00 won per one time, and 300,000 won was paid to the victim for about three hours).

3. Determination

(a) Details of the statement between the victim and G;

When the victim went to the telecom for the defendant's sexual traffic, the victim got sap and sap from the defendant, the defendant was unable to use his cell phone in diving, the defendant was unable to come to contact with I and G, and the defendant was now forced to move to the above soon. The defendant was waiting for the defendant, and the victim was not refused, but the victim did not want to refuse to move to the toilet but did not want to open the window and to sapbry, but the defendant did not have been able to move to the telecom at the request of the defendant again, as stated in the circumstances,. G tried to get out the victim even after the lapse of time after entering the telecom, but the victim did not seem to have been able to know that the victim did not have any contact with the victim at the time of leaving the telecom. G was unable to see that the victim did not have been able to ask the victim about the phone, but the victim did not have been able to have been able to talk.

B. Determination

In full view of the following circumstances revealed from the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, each of the above statements made between the victim and G is difficult to believe, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the fact that the defendant detained the victim at the time and place specified in this part of the facts charged is proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

1) The victim stated at an investigative agency that he/she did not bring about his/her mobile phone at the time of engaging in commercial sex acts, and that he/she would be informed of the name and number of his/her cell phone (Article 108 of the Investigation Records). In addition, the victim did not directly inform the defendant of his/her phone number in this court, and the victim did not contact the defendant with the defendant on January 5, 2016 other than sending 50,000 won after contact with the defendant on January 5, 2016, and that there was no text message or telephone contact with the defendant prior to committing the instant special assault (Article 11, 23, 24, 26 pages of the Investigation Record of the Victim’s Witnesses). However, according to the communications details of each cell phone used by the defendant and the victim, the victim sent the text message to the defendant on November 23, 2015 and around October 16, 2015.

2) In this Court, there is no stringing that a female scams scamscams in the telecom when the victim was found in front of the telecom, and this stated that the first hearing was made (the fifth page of the record book of the witness examination of I) and that G would first consider text messages given and received by the victim and the defendant after the victim met the defendant, and that it was later known that the victim was detained, and that it was later aware of the victim's false statement that the victim was detained (the first page of the record of the witness examination of I), and the first page of the statement made to the effect that I would have become aware of the victim's false statement that the victim was detained (the first page of the record of the witness examination of I), with the victim and G, and that there was no reason to make a statement unfavorable to the victim or G, which is contrary to each of the above statements made by the victim and G.

3) On January 5, 2016, the Defendant made a statement that: (a) the Defendant sent money to the account in the name of L designated by the victim because the victim had no chassis; and (b) the victim made a statement that he was sent KRW 50,000 to the account in the name of L designated by the victim; and (c) the victim also made a statement that he was sent KRW 50,000 to the Defendant by having contact with the Defendant and having the Defendant lent money in the situation where the money is needed by leaving from this court; (d) the victim was detained by the Defendant; (e) the victim was detained from the Defendant; and (e) the victim made a statement that he continued to communicate with the Defendant even after leaving the contact with the Defendant, but

4. Conclusion

Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of facts constituting a crime, and thus, is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325.

Judges Park Jong-ro

Judges Park Jae-gu