However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 16, 2017, around 04:59, the Defendant discovered the victim E (bee 7 years of age) who was locked with his family members within the soup room in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, the Defendant laid down his bridge on the victim's bridge in a situation where the victim was unable to resist, and met the buckbucks.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against a minor under the age of 13 by taking advantage of the victim's resistance impossible condition.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Police statements concerning F;

1. A criminal investigation report (verification of on-site CCTV image data, and details verified through telephone conversations with police officers dispatched to the scene);

1. Report on internal accidents (the details confirmed by telephone conversations between a wooden person and his/her counterpart);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning CCTV recording materials, on-site CCTV photographs;

1. Article 7 (4) and (3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the elective Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and Article 299 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The main sentence of Article 21 (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. The proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (in addition to the instant case, the Defendant did not have any record of punishment for sexual assault crimes, and is likely to expect the effect of preventing recidivism to a certain extent through an order given to undergo treatment for sexual assault imposed in the instant judgment, and as indicated in the reasons for sentencing, there are risks that the Defendant may again commit sexual assault in light of various circumstances as indicated in the reasons for sentencing.

In addition, it is difficult to conclude that the disclosure or notification order of the registered information to the accused is expected and its effect is to be prevented.