The defendant shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

The defendant shall be subject to employment restrictions for each five years in institutions, etc. related to children and juveniles, children-related institutions, and welfare facilities for disabled persons.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against Non-Indicted 2, violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (quasi-indecent act in relation to relatives), violating the Act on

The request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed.

The Defendant was the victim Nonindicted Party 1 (the 10 to 11 years of age at the time of committing the crime), and was living together with the victim from around 2016 to March 2019.

1. Crimes committed in diameter in 2017;

The Defendant, who was in his dwelling area located in Busan Shipping Daegu (No. 2 omitted), laid the breast in the inner clothes of the victim and inserted the fingers into the victim’s sexual flag.

2. Crimes of winter and wintering in 2017;

The defendant inserted his fingers in the victim's sexual organ, who was in his dwelling room in the dwelling space stated in paragraph (1).

3. A crime committed during the 2018 Aggravated Punishment;

The Defendant, who was in a room located in Busan Shipping Daegu ( Address 3 omitted), called "fluor so that she can be frighten", and inserted the victim's right chest into the victim's sexual flag as fluorn fluorn fluorn fluorn fluorn fluorn fluorn.

4. Crimes committed on November 2018;

The defendant, who was divingd at the place specified in paragraph (3), committed an indecent act by force by deceiving the victim's left chest.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed sexual abuse against a victim under the age of 13, who was in a state of impossible to resist due to her disability, committed similar rape, indecent act by force, and at the same time, made sexual humiliation to a child.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police and suspect examination protocol of the accused;

1. Statements and stenographic records of a victim recorded in the victim's video recording CD (Evidence Nos. 2 and 3);

1. The prosecutor’s statement concerning Nonindicted 1

1. The police statement of Nonindicted Party 2

1. Police investigation report (Attachment such as an Serial 18 family relation certificate, etc.);

1. Statement of statement analysis;

1. Photographs of the offender;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 7 (4) and (2) 2 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 299 (a quasi-sexual act committed against minors under the age of 13) of the Criminal Act, Article 5 (3) and (2) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 299 (a quasi-indecent act by quasi-indecent act by blood) of the Criminal Act, Article 7 (4) and (3) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 299 (a quasi-indecent act by blood against minors under the age of 13) of the Criminal Act, Article 71 (1) 2 and 17 subparagraph 5 (a) of the former Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 14925, Oct. 24, 2017); Article 71 (1) 2 and Article 17 (5) (3) through (4) of the Child Welfare Act.

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment on the violation of the Act, etc. on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the minor, similar sex acts under the age of 13) and each of the child welfare violations (the child abuse), the punishment on the violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the minor, similar sex acts under the age of 13), the punishment on the violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the minor, similar sex acts under the age of 13), the punishment on the violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the indecent acts under the age of 13) and the violation of the Child Welfare Act (the punishment on the violation of the Act on the Punishment

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment provided for in the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Minor Crimes under 13 Years of Age)]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following circumstances considered as favorable to the reasons for sentencing)

1. Order to complete programs;

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

1. An employment restriction order;

Paragraphs (1) through (2) of the holding, Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018); Article 56 (1) main text of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018); Article 56 (3) through (4) of the holding, Article 56 (1) main text of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; Article 2 (1) of the Addenda to each Child Welfare Act (Amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018); Article 29-3 (1) of the Child Welfare Act (excluding subparagraph 23); Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Persons with Disabilities Act (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018); Article 59-3 (1) main text of the Act on Welfare of the Act.

Disclosure Order and Exemption from Notice Order

In full view of the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, motive for the instant crime, method of crime, seriousness of consequence and crime, disclosure order or notification order, anticipated side effects and expected side effects to be achieved therefrom, prevention effect of sexual crimes subject to registration, effect of protecting victims, etc., it is determined that there are special circumstances that may not disclose or notify personal information pursuant to 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. Thus, the Defendant is not ordered to disclose or notify personal information.

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Summary of the assertion

In relation to Paragraph 1 of the judgment, there is no fact that the victim's fingers were added to the victim's sexual organ, but there is no fact that the victim's fingers were added to the victim's sexual organ at the victim's panty, but there is no fact that the victim's fingers were added to the victim's sexual organ.

2. Relevant legal principles

A. In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall assess the credibility of the statements, as well as whether the contents of the statements themselves conform to the rationality, logic, appearance, or rule of experience, physical evidence, or third party's statements, and whether the statements made by the victim, etc. conform to the witness's statements made in open court after being sworn before a judge, including the appearance and attitude of the witness, and the penance of the statements made by directly observing various circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the witness's statement made in open court after being sworn before a judge. In a case where the statements made by the victim, etc. are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, the court shall not dismiss them without permission, unless there is any separate evidence to deem that the statements made by the victim, etc. conform to the facts charged objectively and objectively (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012).

B. When determining the credibility of a statement made by an indecent act committed by a child committed by an investigative agency as evidence, considering the fact that the child’s age is strong and is likely to confuse the situation and the source of memory with the child, how much the child’s age is, how much the child’s statement was made after the occurrence of the case, and how much the guardian or investigator who heard the first injury to the child was made during the process of the occurrence of the case before the occurrence of the statement, and whether there is room to bring about a change to the child’s memory by providing information that is not true or inducing a specific answer through repeated newspapers, etc. see, e.g., whether the child’s statement was made by the questioning at the time of the statement, and whether the victim’s statement is inconsistent with 20th or more of its own statements, other than 20th of its own statements, and whether the victim’s statements are inconsistent with 200 or more of its own testimony and supervision, and whether the content of the statement is consistent with 200 or more of its own statements should be examined.

3. Determination

In light of the above legal principles, in light of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence of the judgment, the victim's statement is specific, supporting evidence, and the victim's credibility can be acknowledged as it does not appear to have any other circumstance to reject the credibility of the victim's statement. Thus, it can be acknowledged that the defendant committed similar acts with the victim as stated in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the judgment of the court. Accordingly, the defendant and the defense counsel's assertion cannot be accepted.

(1) A victim is a child of 12 years of age, but has consistently made the following specific and consistent statements concerning the facts constituting the offense in the judgment, and does not seem to have made a false statement from a part of the fact that the flow has not been naturally and experienced:

즉 피해자는 수사기관에서 이 사건 당시의 상황에 관하여 『피고인과는 어머니가 같고 아버지가 다른데, 어릴 때 같이 살다가 따로 떨어져 살았고 자신이 초등학교 3학년 때부터 다시 같이 살았다. (판시 제1항과 관련하여) 2017년 여름경 친구랑 파자마 파티를 했는데, 그날 피고인, 사촌 동생인 공소외 2와 함께 삼촌 방에서 잤다. 잠을 자고 있는데 갑자기 오빠(피고인)가 자신을 만지는 것 같았다. 피고인이 자신의 위쪽(가슴)을 만지다가 손가락으로 자신의 질 구멍에 손가락을 넣었다가 뺐다. 자신은 자는 척을 하면서 뒤척이고 했는데 피고인은 (손가락을) 빼지 않고 계속 만지다가 자기도 만족했는지 다시 잤다. 그러다가 피고인이 갑자기 자신에게 “너 아까 안잤잖아, 왜 자는 척했어?”라고 말을 했다(증거기록 74쪽 내지 76쪽). 피고인의 손가락이 긴데 피고인의 중간 손가락이 반 이상은 들어간 같다(증거기록 77쪽 내지 78쪽). 당시 자신은 반팔, 반바지를 입고 있었고 피고인은 흰색 브이넥 티, 줄이 세 개 있는 아디다스 반바지를 입고 있었다(증거기록 79쪽). (판시 제2항과 관련하여) 2017년 겨울경 ○○에 계신 할머니, 할아버지가 △△으로 내려왔다. 그날 할아버지, 할머니, 엄마, 아빠, 피고인, 사촌들과 같이 자고 있었는데, 밑에 누가 왔다. 피고인인 걸 알게 되었는데, 피고인이 계속 자신의 밑(음부)으로 손가락을 넣었다. 자신이 피고인의 얼굴을 발로 찼는데도 계속 만졌다. 그러다가 갑자기 밑이 축축해졌는데 그게 뭔가 손에서 나오는 물 같았다. (피고인이) 침을 발라서 만졌는지 완전 밑(음부)이 축축했다(증거기록 85쪽 내지 86쪽). 그때마다 오빠(피고인)를 죽이고 싶었다』라고 진술하여, 각 피해 발생의 시기 및 피해가 일어나게 된 경위, 유사성행위 당시의 상황, 구체적인 피해의 내용, 당시 피해자가 느꼈던 느낌과 피해자가 표현한 반응 등 자신이 입었던 피해사실의 주요 부분에 대하여 구체적이고 분명하게 이야기하였는데 그 흐름이 자연스럽다.

In addition, in relation to Paragraph 1 of the holding, the victim does not appear to have expressed detailed descriptions that are difficult to express without direct experience, such as “the length of the defendant’s fingerion”, “whether certain fingers were inserted into one’s own sexual organ,” and “the defendant was the same as the defendant spawn with a large amount of water,” and it appears to be the victim’s statement that is not affected by the interview, and it does not appear that the victim satising the fact of the damage by falsity.

(2) As a result of analyzing the statements made by the victim, Nonindicted 4, who was commissioned by the Busan Regional Police Agency, did not find any emergency or appearance that makes it difficult to explain the victim's statements to the victim due to the nature of the case and the circumstances of the victim's statement investigation. In the statement made by the victim, the victim's speech inappropriate or emotional inappropriateness was not observed, and the investigation at the time of the statement investigation is not observed in the manner of cry, induced, or coercive manner, and it is believed that the victim's personal restrictions, etc. are not affected by the victim's statements. In addition, the statement made by the victim is deemed to have been distorted due to external pressure, co-name, or cancer. In addition, it is supported the credibility of the victim's statements by evaluating that the victim's statements made are reliable (Evidence 154 to 155 pages of evidence records).

③ On April 11, 2019, each crime of the judgment became known by requesting consultation with the Madice on the purport that the victim was victimized by sexual crime from the Defendant and Nonindicted 5 in the village. In other words, the victim did not immediately report the damage to the police or his family, etc. after the occurrence of the instant case. In relation to the reason, the victim was unable to make the Madice immediately due to the Madice (80 pages of the evidence record). There was a little rumor that the victim could not speak about the indecent act of the Madice. At that time, the Defendant could not talk about the indecent act from the Defendant (Evidence record 71 pages). The reason why the Madice made the statement that the Madice caused the instant damage to the Defendant was because the Madice’s child was friendly (Evidence record 91 pages) and that the victim could not be found to have made a false statement or false statement in light of the victim’s motive or false statement in the process of reporting the harm to the Defendant.

④ On the other hand, in relation to Paragraph 1 of the holding, the Defendant stated in an investigative agency that “the victim was her panty with the knowledge of her panty line at the time, and was her blucent, but was not a female-friendly woman, without conspiracy (Evidence No. 329 pages),” and stated that “No female-friendly woman was her fluor at the house,” and that “the fact that she was her fluor at the house was her fluor, has been her fluort.” (Evidence No. 224 pages, 339 pages), and the Defendant’s statement that her fluort the victim’s sexual organ was her fluort with her fluort with the victim’s fluort with the victim’s fluort with the victim’s fluort with the victim’s fluort with the victim’s fluort with the victim’s flut.”

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of three years and six months to two years and six months;

2. The scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines according to the sentencing guidelines (the sentencing guidelines do not have the guidelines for the ordinary concurrent crimes, and thus, the sentencing guidelines do not apply, but in order to appropriately refer to the sentencing guidelines for violations of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the act of quasi-minority under thirteen years of age) with heavy punishment, the following shall be stated:

(a) Basic crimes, the first concurrent crimes, and the second concurrent crimes: Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a minor, quasi-incompetent act under the age of 13);

d. A sex offense subject to the age of less than 13 (Type 4).

[Special Convicts] Reductions: Note 1) Non-Punishments

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Area, 4 to 7 years of imprisonment

(b) Scope of recommendations according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: From 4 to 12 years of imprisonment (the upper limit of basic crimes + the upper limit of the first concurrent crime + 1/2 of the upper limit of the second concurrent crime + 1/3 of the upper limit of the second concurrent crime);

3. Determination of sentence;

The Defendant committed an indecent act against his father who was merely a primary school student with multiple similar acts and committed an indecent act. In light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the degree of the indecent act, and the above, the nature of the crime is not good and the possibility of criticism is high. The victim who was at the time of forming a sound sexual identity and values normally seems to have suffered considerable mental shock and pain due to the instant crime. These points are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

The Defendant led to the confession of some crimes and divided his mistake. The Defendant does not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual consent with the victim. The Defendant is a primary offender without any previous conviction. These points are favorable to the Defendant.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and result of the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions shown in the pleading, such as the circumstances after the crime

Registration of Personal Information

Where a conviction becomes final and conclusive on the facts constituting a crime in the judgment, the defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and thus he/she is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 4

The acquittal portion

1. Facts charged;

The defendant is the victim non-indicted 2 (Taking part, 8 years old at that time) and the defendant was in a private village.

On January 2018, the Defendant was able to write down the sound of the victim's clothes in the front side of the victim who was living in the inside room in the Gyeonggi-si, which is the domicile of the first patrolman.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed sexual abuse, which, at the same time, led the victim under the age of 13 who was in a state of failing to resist due to sleep, and at the same time led the child to feel sexual humiliation.

2. Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion

The defendant does not commit any indecent act against the victim as stated in the facts charged.

3. Determination

(a) Relevant legal principles;

In a case where the defendant strongly denies the facts charged and the direct evidence consistent with the facts charged in the record is practically a victim's statement, and the remaining evidence is merely hearsay evidence based on the victim's statement, in order to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged, the defendant's statement requires high probative value so as to have little doubt about the authenticity and accuracy of the statement in order to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged. When determining whether the defendant has such probative value, the victim's statement should be comprehensively considered not only the rationality, consistency, objective reasonableness, but also personal elements such as the victim's sexual character (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do16413, May 10, 201).

On the other hand, the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence with probative value that makes a judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be determined with the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006; 2013Do10316, Jan. 16, 2014).

(b) Evidence relationship;

In this case where the Defendant denies the entire facts charged from the investigative agency to this court, the evidence supporting the facts charged among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is the victim’s statement to the investigative agency and the victim’s statement analysis expert Nonindicted 4’s statement to the investigation agency that he had committed an indecent act from the victim. However, all remaining evidence except the victim’s statement are based on the victim’s previous contents, and thus, evidence directly proving the facts charged of this case is not sufficient to prove the victim’s statement. Under the above evidence, it is necessary to examine whether the Defendant’s statement is acknowledged as indecent act by force (this evidence No. 19 of the evidence list “the result of the investigation report (the result of the examination of the terminal detection). If it is intended to admit the admissibility of evidence as a factual relation with the result of the examination of the detection of the false speech detection machine, first, it is necessary to change the victim’s statement with a certain psychological condition, second, it is reasonable that the prosecutor’s oral response is sufficient to determine whether there is a change in the content of the examination.

C. In the instant case:

In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence adopted and examined by the court, it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the Defendant’s indecent act by force.

1) The victim's statement about the situation before and after the indecent act and the criminal's criminal conduct, etc.

The investigation of the facts charged of this case was not conducted by the victim's report, but by the victim of each crime of this case, the non-indicted 1, the victim of each crime of this case, reported to the school and investigated

However, the victim stated at an investigative agency that “The victim was 2nd time of prosecution, 192 to 194.” On the other hand, the victim stated that “the victim was satisfefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefeb, 3) and 6th week, which was friendly with Nonindicted 5. At the time, she was satisfefefefefebefefefebefe at sat (5) and was unsatfefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefef at the victim’s body, but the victim was unsatfefefefefefefefed by the Defendant at the time of 1’s statement.”

2) Possibility that another criminal exists

At the time of the instant facts charged at the investigative agency, the Defendant stated that the victim was sleeped in the inner room as the Defendant’s mother, Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 5, and that he was sleeped in the ward (Evidence records 230 pages, 352 pages, and 353 pages), and that the victim was sleepd in the inner room (Evidence records 193 pages), and that the victim was sleepd in the inner room at the time when Nonindicted 5 was sleepd. Meanwhile, Nonindicted 1 stated in the investigative agency that Nonindicted 5, a private village, committed indecent acts several times at the time (the investigation of this case was conducted when Nonindicted 1 reported the damage inflicted on Nonindicted 5 to the Defendant, and Nonindicted 5 was not conducted separately at the investigative agency in relation to the instant facts charged, and it was difficult to conclude that the victim was an indecent act committed by Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 1, and the victim was slick at the time of committing the indecent act.

3) As to the statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 to the investigation agency

Nonindicted 1 made a statement at an investigative agency that the victim called “the victim’s body was her body of the victim,” and the victim made the statement to “Nado” (Evidence No. 95 pages). However, Nonindicted 1 made a statement at an investigative agency that “the victim is called the Defendant,” and Nonindicted 1 made a statement to the effect that “the victim did not know that “the victim was her body,” or that “the victim was her body,” and “the victim was her body,” referring to Nonindicted 5, her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her. her her her. her. her... her her.

4) As to the statement analysis opinion by a statement analysis expert

Nonindicted 3 presented a statement analysis expert opinion to the effect that “The verbal inappropriate or emotional inappropriate sense in the victim’s statement was not observed and that the situation at the time of investigation or the personal limitation of the victim was not affected by the victim’s statement, and that the victim’s statement was unlikely to distort due to external pressure and crym or cancer, and thus, sexual assault victim’s statement is believed to be reliable” (Evidence No. 251 to 252 of the record). However, the above statement appears to be an open question in order to promote a free meeting of the victim’s experience, but it seems that it was inevitable to use the victim’s questions, specific questions, and selective questions because the victim did not voluntarily make a statement and made specific difficulties in making a statement.” The victim’s statement to the effect that “the victim’s statement was unable to specifically state his experience on the victim’s personal experience,” “The victim’s statement to the victim’s statement to the effect that it was not consistent with the victim’s statement to the victim’s statement to the effect that it was necessary to analyze the victim’s statement or additional evidence.”

4. Conclusion

This part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judgment on the request for attachment order

1. Summary of the request for attachment order;

A person subject to an order to attach an electronic device is likely to have committed several sexual crimes and recommit a sexual crime against a minor under the age of 19.

2. Determination

(a) Relevant legal principles;

The risk of recidivism of a sexual crime under Article 5(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes means that the possibility of repeating the crime is insufficient only, and that there is a probable probability that the person subject to the request to attach an order to an electronic device may injure the legal peace by committing a sexual crime again in the future. The existence of the risk of recidivism of a sexual crime shall be objectively determined by comprehensively assessing various circumstances, such as the occupation and environment of the person subject to the request to attach an electronic device, the criminal conduct prior to the crime, the motive, means, circumstances after the crime, the situation after the crime, and the situation after the crime, etc., and such determination shall be based on the time of the judgment, since it is a assumed judgment on the future (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7410, 201

B. In the instant case

In full view of the following circumstances and the age, character, conduct and environment, and the circumstances after the crime, which can be recognized by the evidence adopted and examined by this court, it is difficult to readily conclude that the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone is highly probable that the person subject to the attachment order will destroy legal peace by committing a sex crime again in the future.

(1) A person subject to a request for attachment order shall have no record of punishment for a sex offense and no record of criminal punishment shall be applied.

② Although the Defendant’s criminal act of this case has somewhat distorted sexual beliefs and the character and conduct accordingly revealed, it seems that there is room for preventing recidivism and correcting character and behavior even through imprisonment imposed on the person who requested an attachment order, order to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 40 hours, order to restrict employment for 5 years, and family relationship.

Therefore, the request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 9(4)1 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders on the ground that the request for attachment order of this case is groundless.

Judges Jeong Sung-ho (Presiding Judge)

1) In light of the fact that the victim submitted a written application for non-prosecution of punishment to the defendant to the court and consulted with the counsel with the child protection agency, it is reasonable to deem that the victim's intent that the defendant does not want to be punished is based on his/her genuine will. Thus, the victim's intention is deemed as a special mitigation factor in the sentencing guidelines. However, the "non-prosecution of punishment", which is a special mitigation factor in the sentencing guidelines, means "the defendant is divided into a truth about his/her criminal act, has made substantial compensation for damage by making a serious effort to reach an agreement, and the victim has accepted it accurately and accepted it within the legal and social meaning of the committee of no punishment and did not want the defendant's punishment." In light of the relationship between the defendant and the victim, there is a little room for doubt as to whether the defendant was seriously divided into his/her criminal act, or whether the victim was aware of the legal and social meaning of the committee of no punishment.

Note 2) The mother of the defendant is the mother of the defendant.

Note 3) It is the victim of the criminal facts indicated in the judgment as the defendant's Lee Dong-dong.

Note 4) The Defendant’s interest is the victim’s interest and the victim’s private village.