Defendant 1 shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When Defendant 1 fails to pay the above fine, the above Defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period calculated by converting KRW 100,000 into one day.

To order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine against Defendant 1.

Defendant 1 shall order Defendant 1 to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

All appeals filed by Defendant 2 and prosecutor against Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 are dismissed.

A. Defendant 1 (Defendant of the Supreme Court Decision)

(1) misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles

피고인 1은 성적 농담을 하는 피고인 2에게 경각심을 주려는 의도로 “이것도 만진 거가”라고 물으면서 손가락으로 피해자의 어깨를 톡톡 친 것에 불과하다. 피고인 1의 행위는 추행행위가 아닐 뿐만 아니라 강제추행의 고의도 없었다. 피고인 1에 대하여 강제추행죄를 인정한 원심판결에는 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해한 위법이 있다.

(2) Unreasonable sentencing

The punishment sentenced by the court below (2 million won of fine, and 40 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant 2

The punishment sentenced by the court below (5 million won of a fine and 40 hours of completion of a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

(c) Prosecutors;

(1) misunderstanding of facts (a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes against Defendants)

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the statement of the victim with credibility, the court below found the Defendants not guilty of the facts, despite the fact that the Defendants committed indecent act by force on the part of the victim, on the grounds that the Defendants 1, 3, and 1 together with Nonindicted 1 met the shoulder of the victim, and Defendant 2 took the victim’s hand, and Defendant 1, 3, and Nonindicted 1 1 did so.

(2) Unreasonable sentencing

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant 1 and the defendant 2 is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination on the establishment of Defendant 1’s crime of indecent act by compulsion

(a) Statement of the victim;

(1) On June 28, 2018, a statement in the complaint filed by the complainant

The victim was seated in a kart in the waiting room of the 1st century, and the defendant 1 was "I am you am you am you am you am you am you am you am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am

(2) The first statement made by the police on June 28, 2018

피해자는 피고인들 및 공소외 1과 힐 코스 3번 홀 앞에 갔는데 앞 팀이 티샷을 하고 있어서 카트 시동을 끄고 카트에서 기다리고 있었다. 카트 제일 앞에 피해자, 조수석에 공소외 1, 피해자의 바로 뒤에 피고인 1, 피고인 1의 오른쪽에 피고인 3이 앉아 있었고, 피고인 2는 카트에서 내려서 피해자의 바로 옆쪽에 서 있었다. 피고인들과 공소외 1이 대기하던 중 여자랑 섹스를 하는 얘기, 골프장 캐디는 예쁘다, 어린 여자들이랑 애인관계에 있다는 얘기를 들으라는 듯이 하였다. 이때 피고인 1이 갑자기 피해자의 어깨를 주무르면서 미투 이야기를 하고 ‘이게 만지는 거가?’라고 해서, 피해자가 ‘손을 대는 것이 당연히 만지는 거지 만지는 거 아닙니까. 하지 마세요.’라고 하였으나, 피고인 1, 공소외 1, 피고인 2, 피고인 3이 순서대로 재미있다는 듯이 양손으로 피해자의 양쪽 어깨를 기분 나쁘게 주무르듯이 5분 정도 만졌다. 피고인 2 외에 다른 사람은 어깨 만진 것이 전부이다.

(3) The second statement made by the police on July 27, 2018

Defendant 1 and Defendant 2, who got her to sit at the driver’s seat of the cart in the middle of the 1st century, she was the victim, Nonindicted 1, and Defendant 1, and Defendant 2, respectively, and her left the left side of the victim. While Defendant 1 was her fluencing a sexual intercourse with a female of the same kind, he was fluencing, and her fluencing a female, Defendant 1 was her fluencing, and her fluencing a flus in the middle of the 3st century, and was her fluencing with the victim by taking the fluencing flus, while her fluencing the victim’s flus, and was her fluencing with the victim’s flusss flus.”

(4) Judgment of the court below

Defendant 3 was placed in the driver’s seat of the victim, Nonindicted 1, and Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 immediately after the victim’s right at the driver’s seat of the victim, the chief of the group, and Defendant 2, respectively. Defendant 1, while making a lusent talk, she met the victim’s shoulder by stating that Defendant 1 “I am only? I am only? I am? I am? I am. I am the victim’s shoulder once. I am the victim’s shoulder by saying “I am? I am? I am? I am? I am? I am? I am.”

B. Defendant 1’s statement and assertion

어느 홀인지 정확하게 기억나지 않으나, 피고인 2가 피해자에게 ‘우리 농담 좀 하면 되냐? 기분 좋게 들어줄 거가? 신고 안할 거가?’라는 말을 하였다. 이에 피고인 1이 요즘 세태가 옛날과 다르기 때문에 조심해야 한다는 생각이 들어 ‘○○컨트리에서 캐디 추행으로 신고를 해서 112가 와서 바로 잡혀간 게 있다. 요즘 조심해야 한다’고 말하며, 피해자의 옆자리에서 왼쪽 손가락 2개(검지와 중지)로 피해자의 오른쪽 어깨를 톡톡 치면서 ‘이 것도 만진 거가?’라고 물었고, 이에 피해자가 웃으면서 ‘이것도 만진겁니다’라고 답변한 것이 전부라는 취지로 진술하거나 주장하고 있다.

C. The extent of Defendant 1’s shoulderion

피해자의 진술 중 피고인들과 공소외 1이 돌아가며 피해자의 어깨를 주물러 만졌다는 부분은 원심이 판시한 바와 같이 이를 쉽게 믿기 어렵다. 그러나 원심이 채택하여 조사한 증거에 의하여 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정에 비추어 보면, 피해자의 진술 중 피고인 1이 피해자의 어깨를 만졌다는 부분만큼은 신빙성이 있으므로, 피고인 1이 피해자의 어깨를 톡톡 친 것에 불과한 것이 아니라 주무르듯이 만졌다고 충분히 인정할 수 있다.

(1) Identity and consistency of the statements made by the victim

The victim's statement is consistent with the part that "the victim's statement contains a detailed and subjective appraisal that it is difficult to understand without experience, such as the victim's statement, and at least the part that "the defendant 1 was faced with his shoulder," such as the content of conversation exchanged between the defendant and the non-indicted 1, the content that the defendant 1 was broken in while making a lusium, the victim's response to the defendant 1, such as "sain sain sain sain sain sain", etc.

(2) Nonindicted 2’s statement

캐디 마스터인 공소외 2는 이 사건 다음날 피해자로부터 그 경위를 들었다. 공소외 2는 경찰에서, 피고인 1이 피해자의 어깨를 만졌다는 말을 피해자로부터 들었다고 진술하였고, 원심법정에서는, 피고인 1이 손을 피해자의 왼쪽 어깨에 얹으면서 ‘이게 성희롱이가, 성추행이가’라고 말하였고, 피해자가 ‘성희롱입니다’라고 하자 ‘이게 어떻게 성희롱이 되노’라고 말하면서 피해자의 왼쪽 어깨를 만지고 이후 양쪽 어깨를 만졌다는 말을 피해자로부터 들었다고 진술하였다. 공소외 2의 경찰 및 원심법정에서의 진술은 일관되고 피해자의 진술과도 일치한다. 피해자가 공소외 2와 이 사건에 관하여 상의한 시기 및 경위를 고려하면, 피고인 1이 단순히 피해자의 어깨를 톡톡 친 것에 불과한데도 자신의 어깨를 만졌다고 공소외 2에게 과장하여 진술할 이유가 없는 것으로 보이고, 공소외 2 역시 골프장에서 피해자를 관리하는 지위에 있기는 하지만, 그렇다고 하여 피고인 1에 대하여 허위로 진술하는 것으로 보기는 어렵다.

(3) is consistent with the circumstances at the time.

The victim stated that Defendant 1 and Nonindicted 1 made a sexual scam in the cart before he met the shoulder. Defendant 1 also stated at the police station that Defendant 2 asked the victim that “I will see whether I will come back with me? I will come up with me? I will come up with me? I will come up with the victim?” In this case, the Defendants and Nonindicted 1 appears to have made a sexual scams with the victim. In this situation, it is consistent with the situation at the time that Defendant 1 met the victim’s scams while I talked about the scams. On the other hand, Defendant 1 stated that “I would have to go up with the necessary mechanism because I reported the indecent act at ○○○ consortium,” while Defendant 1 stated that “I will go up with the right shoulder of the victim and scambling it with the left hand,” but was natural in light of the above circumstances.

또 피고인 1은 경찰에서, 피해자가 “이것도 만진 겁니다”는 말을 하였다고 진술하였고(증거기록 제85쪽), 피해자도 수사기관과 원심법정에서 같은 취지의 진술을 하였으므로, 피해자가 당시 위와 같은 말을 한 것은 분명하다. 피고인 1이 피해자의 어깨를 톡톡 친 것에 불과하다면, 피해자가 “당연히 만지는 거죠”라는 반응을 보일 리 없고, 이러한 점은 피해자의 진술에 부합한다.

(4) Possibility that the victim could be mistaken

피해자는 공소외 1이 조수석에 앉고 피고인 1이 뒷좌석에 앉았다고 진술한 반면, 피고인들과 공소외 1은 공소외 1이 뒷좌석에, 피고인 1이 조수석에 앉았다고 진술하고 있어, 피고인 1과 공소외 1의 카트 내에서의 위치에 관하여 피해자와 피고인 1의 진술이 차이가 난다. 또 피해자는 조수석에 앉은 공소외 1이 금테 안경을 썼다고 진술하였으나, 공소외 1은 금테 안경을 쓰지 않았고 피고인 1이 금테 안경을 썼으므로, 이 부분은 피해자의 진술에 오류가 있는 것으로 보인다. 그러나 피고인 1의 진술과 피해자의 진술에 차이가 있는 부분은 당시 피고인 1이 ‘피해자의 뒤에 앉았는지 옆자리에 앉았는지’, ‘톡톡 쳤는지 주무르듯이 만졌는지’일 뿐이고, 앞서 본 바와 같은 사정을 종합하여 보면, 피해자가 어깨를 만진 사람을 공소외 1이나 다른 사람임에도 불구하고 피고인 1로 오인하였을 가능성은 없다.

D. Whether Defendant 1’s act constitutes an indecent act by compulsion

“Indecent act” means an act that causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to good sexual morality, and thus infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it is so determined shall be determined carefully in full view of the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship before the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner of act, and the surrounding objective situation and sexual morality concept, etc., and shall not be deemed to have any substantial difference depending on the body part of the woman’s indecent act (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do52, Apr. 16, 2004, etc.).

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence adopted and examined by the court below, Defendant 1’s act constitutes indecent act by force.

(1) At the time, Defendant 1 is a customer of a golf course under 68 years of age, and the victim is the first met with the golf course capital of 27 years of age.

② Defendant 2, in the atmosphere where Defendant 2 started with the purport that “I would have a sexual scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopics

③ The victim shotly told Defendant 1 to the effect that Defendant 1 does not fit.

E. Sub-committee

피고인 1이 피해자의 어깨를 주무르듯이 만져 강제추행한 사실이 인정된다. 그런데도 피고인 1이 피해자의 어깨를 톡톡 쳤다고만 인정한 원심판결에는 사실을 오인한 위법이 있다.

3. Determination on the grounds of appeal on the prosecutor’s violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

In order to establish a crime of special indecent act by committing a crime of indecent act by force by two or more persons under Article 4(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, there should be a sharing of the act of commission as an objective requirement, and the act of commission should reach the extent that it is deemed that there is a cooperative relationship between time and place (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2870, Aug. 20, 2004).

Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendants could not be deemed to have engaged in indecent act by compulsion by force by conspiracy with Nonindicted Party 1. Examining the evidence admitted and examined by the lower court in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, the lower court’s judgment is justifiable, and there was no error

4. Determination on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by Defendant 2 and the prosecutor

The instant crime was committed by Defendant 2, who gldddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

However, Defendant 2’s recognition of his act and wrong, and there is no previous conviction or fine beyond the same criminal record or fine. Defendant 2 does not want the punishment of Defendant 2 in the investigation stage by mutual consent with the victim. In full view of the various circumstances revealed in the records and arguments of this case, including Defendant 2’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, consequence, etc. of the instant crime, the punishment imposed by the lower court to Defendant 2 cannot be deemed to be appropriate, somewhat somewhat somewhat somewhat and somewhat unreasonable or unreasonable.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal against Defendant 1 is partly reasonable, the part of the judgment below against Defendant 1 among the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal against Defendant 2 and the prosecutor is again decided as follows after the pleading. Since the appeal against Defendant 2, Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

§ 298 of the Criminal Code. Selection of fine

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

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. To exempt the public disclosure order, notification order and employment restriction order;

In full view of the following facts: (a) Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; (b) Articles 49(1) proviso and 50(1) proviso of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; (c) Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018); (d) the proviso to 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); and (d) the proviso to Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018); and (d) the age, occupation, and social relationship of Defendant 1 appears to have the effect of preventing re-offending.

Fines not exceeding 15 million won;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

Since the sentencing criteria are chosen, the sentencing criteria are not applied.

3. Determination of sentence;

The crime of this case is committed by Defendant 1 by forceing the shoulder of a glard victim at his golf course, and the nature and circumstance of the crime cannot be deemed unhulled. The crime of this case was committed by the victim through sexual humiliation and mental shock, and the Defendant did not take measures to recover from damage.

However, Defendant 1 does not focus on the type of indecent act exercised by Defendant 1 and there is no criminal record beyond the same criminal record or fine. In addition, Defendant 1’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, consequence, etc. of the instant crime, and the circumstances revealed in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, shall be determined by the same sentence as the order.

The Defendants and Nonindicted Party 1 are the customers of △△ Golf Clubs, and the victims Nonindicted Party 3 (the victims, the age of 27) are gld.

Defendant 1, along with Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Nonindicted 1, in mind that he would commit an indecent act on gndyd with Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Nonindicted 1, on June 22, 2018, at around 15:30 on June 22, 2018, Defendant 1, Nonindicted 1, Defendant 1, Defendant 3, and Defendant 3 are on the back of the steering seat, respectively, on the back of the steering seat. Defendant 2, while waiting in a cart at the back of the driver’s seat, was engaged in a mutually related experience or age assessment of gndydyds, Nonindicted 3’s external appearance assessment of gndyds, and Nonindicted 1, the victim’s shouldered both by hand, and Defendant 1, “I knd the victim’s intention?” and “I am the victim’s intention?” The victim’s intention to refuse to do so.

계속해서 피고인 1은 피고인 2, 피고인 3 및 공소외 1과 함께 같은 날 16:00경 위 골프클럽의 힐 코스 6번 홀부터 같은 날 19:30경 위 골프클럽의 레이크 코스 9번 홀에 이르기까지 피고인 2는 “네가 이상형이다. 니 같이 작고 가벼운 애들이 들어서 하기 좋다. 김해 와서 만나자. 필리핀에 같이 가자. 내 이름은 괜히 성기가 아니다.”라는 등의 성적인 말을 하면서 매 홀마다 골프채를 건네주는 피해자의 손을 잡아 놓아주지 않고 자신의 몸 쪽으로 끌어당기고, 피고인 1 등은 피해자에게 “피고인 2가 니가 진짜 마음에 들었는갑다. 연락처 줘봐라.”라고 말하며 부추기고, 피고인 3은 “피고인 2가 돈이 많은 사람이다. 니한테 꼽혔다. 힘도 좋다.”라고 말하였으며, 공소외 1은 “좋겠다, 너는.”이라며 “니 나이가 관계하기 딱 좋다.”며 운전석에 앉아 있는 피해자에게 자신의 몸을 들이대었고, 피해자가 싫은 내색을 보이자 “골프장에서 대접받는 사람이고, 위치가 있는 사람이다. VIP다. 똑바로 해라. 기분 안 좋은 티내지 마라.”라고 하며 위세를 보였다.

Accordingly, Defendant 1 committed an indecent act by force in collaboration with Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Nonindicted 1.

2. Determination

This part of the facts charged against Defendant 1 constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime and thus, a not-guilty verdict should be rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but it is found that Defendant 1 was guilty of the crime of indecent act by compulsion within the scope of the same facts charged. Thus, the judgment

Judges Kim Jin-hun (Presiding Judge)