A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person operating ‘D' on the second floor of the building in the C University located in B, and the victim E (a family name, male, and age 25) was a student attending the C University and decided to teach from the aforementioned ‘D’.

On March 5, 2017, at around 20:00, the Defendant: (a) moved to F’s place in the vicinity of “D” around 23:00 on the same day while she had had the victim work in “D” with the victim as well as in “D”; (b) had the victim moved to F’s place in the vicinity of “D” around 23:00 on the same day; (c) had the victim kidd from the Defendant’s house in which the victim was under the influence of alcohol and had the diving 102; and (d) had the victim kidd from the back of the victim who was under the influence of alcohol at around 01:20 on the following day, she she was kiddd down with the victim’s inner part and clothes, and her sexual organ fladdd with the victim’s sexual organ.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim by using the victim's resistanceable condition.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E, H and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a report on the occurrence, each on-site photograph, closure photo of telephone conversations, and telephone conversations list;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act; Articles 299 and 298 of the Criminal Act; the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Article 16(2) and (3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes committed by the Defendant at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant alleged that he was in a state of mental or physical harm by drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime. Thus, according to the records, the Defendant was aware of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime, but considering the circumstances such as the background and result of the instant case, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.

The reason for sentencing is disadvantageous.