However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On September 11, 2015, the Defendant, at around 2:45, at the main point of the trade name, “F” located in E on September 11, 2015, committed an indecent act by force on the part of the victim G (the 25 years old), who was an employee of the Defendant’s seated above the son’s side of the Defendant’s son, and her breast by inserting his son into the victim’s inner part, and her son by inserting his son into the victim’s inner part, thereby committing an indecent act by coercioning the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H;

1. Statement made by each prosecution with respect to G and H;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A H statement;

1. 112 Statement on processing of reported cases, and replys to the details of report 112;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the field map prepared by G;

1. Article 298 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 298 of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Consideration of favorable circumstances among the following grounds for sentencing);

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes committed against the Defendant

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted only the fact that the victim's shoulders or knifes the victim, and they do not have the chest or knife.

2. In determining the credibility of a victim’s statement in a case where the victim’s testimony in the court of law becomes more unclear than the victim’s statement in an investigative agency, it is common that the victim’s memory in light of the empirical rule goes over depending on the passage of time. The victim of a criminal act is prosecuted after the defendant was prosecuted on his/her primary basis, and then is asked for doubt as to whether the defendant’s testimony is consistent with his/her memory when the defendant appears in the court and is asked for a criminal investigation by the defendant or his/her defense counsel. Accordingly, there is a possibility that such possibility may lead to the defendant and the victim to avoid a conclusive statement and make a ambiguous statement.