If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On March 6, 2017, the Defendant: (a) when the Defendant was on board the line of subway No. 1, subway No. 08:12, and the subway was different in the safe-sea station in the subway, and the Defendant was able to know the name of the victim who was shot in his front of the subway, and the victim C (V, 19 years of age) who continued to be on face of the victim’s sexual flag was on the part of the victim’s her sexual flag and got off the victim C (V, s. 19 years of age) who was facing his front.

Accordingly, the defendant committed each indecent act against the victims in the subway, which is a densely concentrated public place.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Investigation report (case of securing not more than two victims of sexual assault);

1. The map of place where the crime was committed;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the closure of a crime, screen image, and a photographic;

1. Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Selection of Punishment, etc. against Crimes;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed to Order;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical weakness under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, the Defendant and the defense counsel had a mental and physical weakness at the time of committing the instant crime due to intellectual disorder.

The argument is asserted.

According to the records, the facts constituting class 3 of intellectual disability may be recognized, but in full view of all the circumstances such as the background and mode of the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, etc., the defendant was in a state where the ability or decision-making ability was weak due to intellectual disability at the time of the crime of this case.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the above argument is not accepted.

Although sentencing is not easy in light of the background and contents of the crime, it is against the Defendant’s wrongness as the third degree of intellectual disability, the primary offender, and the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation, and occupation.