Even if the victims are implied, negative, or understandable, it is also accepted by the victims.

In light of the following circumstances, namely, that the name of the crime is not a similar indecent act, but a similar rape, Article 297-2 of the Criminal Act, which is the provision for the crime of rape, is stipulated in Article 297-2 of the Criminal Act, which is the following provisions for the crime of rape, the elements of the crime of rape are similar to that for the crime of rape, and the statutory penalty is close to the crime of rape, it shall be deemed that the crime of indecent act constitutes a mitigated element of the crime of rape rather than aggravating element of the crime of indecent act. Therefore, the legal principles of indecent act, such as the crime of indecent act, in the crime of coercion, are not applicable to similar rape, and thus, it shall not be punished as a similar rape.

Moreover, in this case, the victims could have sufficiently predicted the similarity of the defendant, and thus, there was a habitation.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of similar rape among the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

As to the violation of the Medical Service Act in the judgment of the court below, the defendant was employed by B as an employee, who received benefits from B in return for the reason that he was not directly paid to customers, and therefore, there was a profit-making purpose of the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

However, the court below found the defendant guilty of violating the Medical Service Act among the facts charged in this case on the ground that the defendant was for profit-making purposes.

Sentencing (the defendant and the prosecutor) The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The court below held the defendant.