성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
1. On July 8, 2015, at around 07:40, the Defendant: (a) sealed the part of the sexual flag into the victim’s her son, such as a woman who was suffering from a crepit of the name or an unexplic damage (arounded on the boom blost, a black blost) among the passengers concentrated in the subway E Station 1 line in Bupyeong-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si.
Dud actions were repeated.
The Defendant, in such a way, committed an indecent act on the part of the public transportation vehicle prior to the arrival of the same route FF station for about eight minutes.
2. On August 11, 2015, at around 07:31, the Defendant: (a) pushed back passengers concentrated in the subway 1 line E station located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, and attached the sexual part to the victim’s mack, such as the victim G (n, 30 years of age).
Dud actions were repeated.
The Defendant, in such a way, committed an indecent act on the part of the public transport vehicle prior to the arrival of the same route H, for about eight minutes.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. The police statement concerning G;
1. Application of each video Act and subordinate statutes in the course of committing a crime, as a closure photograph (2 No. 5) and the closure of a crime scene (8 No. 195);
1. Article 11 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and Selection of fines for the crimes in question;
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed;
1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for sentencing of the instant case is that the instant crime was committed by the subway that citizens should use easily, and that it is not good to the nature of the crime because it was intentionally and intentionally accessed the subject of the crime, and that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with one victim.
However, there is no criminal record against the defendant, and the defendant is now.