beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.01.15 2013고정1200

강제추행

Text

A fine of three million won shall be imposed on a defendant.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 19, 2013, the Defendant, at the D convenience store located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju on April 22:46, 2013, followed by the victim E (n'e, 43 years of age), and the victim's her son's son's son's son's son's son's son

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of the video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Article 298 of the Criminal Act and Article 298 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and defense counsel's assertion on the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order asserted that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case. According to G's inquiry inquiry reply letter by the police officer belonging to the Gwangju Western Police Station, the defendant's drinking was recognized at the time of the instant crime, but it seems that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the above assertion is rejected.

Where the conviction of this case against a defendant who has registered personal information becomes final and conclusive, the defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information under Article 32(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 2012); thus, he/she is obligated to submit personal information to relevant agencies pursuant to Articles 5(1) and 43 of the Addenda to the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amended by Act No. 11

However, in light of the fact that the defendant has no criminal record of the same kind, it is judged that there is a special reason that the disclosure of personal information should not be disclosed, so it does not order the disclosure of registered information.