beta
Text
The Defendant’s motion to attach the instant attachment order is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The facts charged and the facts leading up to the request for the attachment order [the facts charged] The defendant and the person requesting the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendants") on April 19, 2017, on the apartment rooftop C407 apartment roof, the victim D (13 years old), E, E, and F, while drinking alcohol together with the victim, while drinking alcohol, E, E, E, and F, and F, when getting off on the rooftop, there was a room for the victim to rape, the victim was able to have been approaching the victim, and the victim was approaching the victim who was expected to have been under the influence of alcohol, had the victim's own access to the wall, had the victim's own satisfaction with the victim's own entrance, had the victim's forced dancing, and had the victim's bucks.
Accordingly, the victim refers to the "Ie-day", and the defendant, who is placed on the floor of the victim, once again flags the victim's chest, etc. by hand, and knee-knee-knee-knee-kne-kne-kne-kne's kne-kne-kne-kne's kne-kne-kne's kne-kne against the victim, and
Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim who is a child or juvenile.
[The defendant's person who committed a sexual crime against a person under the age of 19 as above and is likely to recommit a sexual crime in light of the background of the crime, the defendant's tendency, etc., so it is necessary to attach an electronic tracking device.
2. Determination
A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant, along with the victim, E, and F, drinked alcohol on the apartment rooftop along with the victim, E, and F, and took a friend, and took a friend to the victim who tried to be cryp on the rooftop, and there was no assault to commit rape against the victim.
B. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a relevant criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which leads to a judge’s conviction to the extent that there is no room for a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to the prosecutor’s conviction, it shall be sufficient.