On July 2, 2012, around 22:30 on July 2, 2012, the Defendant taken the body of another person against his will, by photographing the body of another person who could cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame by using the cell phone camera of the Defendant, where the victim D (the 30-year age of 30), who was a guest outside of the window of a female toilet for women of the C restaurant, scam, hump, and hump.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (the attachment of cellphone images to CDs);

1. The relevant statutory provisions of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes stated “the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes” in the applicable provisions of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, but this provision is obvious that it is a clerical error in the “Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”

Article 13(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (Selection of Imprisonment) The Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime even though he/she had a record of being sentenced to suspended sentence due to the same criminal history, and in light of the Defendant’s attitude of such act, it is determined that the possibility of repeating the instant crime is high, and that the punishment through detention for a certain period of time is urgent in order to prevent the Defendant’s aggravation of criminal conduct. It is so decided