2018Gohap299 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Intimidation, etc.);

Habitual conflict, indecent act by compulsion, Violation of the Attorney-at-Law

Masan (tentative name), 52-years, South, and North

Residential Ulsan

Registration Criteria Place

Kim Jong-un (Court) (Court of the Republic of Korea) (Court of Justice)

Attorney Choi Choi-soo

April 24, 2020

Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three years. The penalty of KRW 1,633,33 shall be collected from Defendant.

Facts of crime

Defendant 1 operated entertainment centers on the second floor of the building in Ulsan-gu, the second floor of the building in Ulsan-gu with Defendant’s wife Kim ○, with the trade name of “○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○”. Defendant 2 had been working for four police stations affiliated with the Ulsan District Police Agency and the Director of the National Assembly report, etc., and was working for the above ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○. At present, the Ministry of Justice is working as a member of the Police Assembly, and is in charge of the duties of the Chairman of the Mana○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○.

1. Compulsory indecent acts;

The defendant knew that the victim's AO (the age of 53) operating a singing practice room in the "○○○○" in the vicinity of an entertainment drinking house around the "○○○○○○○○" around the night 2012 is running a business, such as selling alcoholic beverages to customers in the "○○○○○" singing practice room, and the defendant found the victim as the "○○○○○○○" singing practice room in the "○○○○○○" 00", "I tried to find the victim as the chairperson of this NA-dong commercial meeting, who works as the head of the government office," and thereafter I tried to use the "○○○○○'s singing practice room" as the victim's an indecent act on August 1, 2014, "the victim's body" and "the victim's body" as "the victim's musical act", "the victim's own body" and "the victim's own body" as the victim's musical act.

2. Violation of law by an attorney;

It is not easy to receive or promise to receive money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits under the pretext of solicitation or good offices with respect to cases or affairs to be handled by a public official;

A. On August 2014, when Defendant came to know of the fact that the regional investigation commission of the Ulsan Metropolitan Police Agency, the regional investigation commission of the news department, and the leap ○○ who operates the news department, etc., Defendant informed her fact to her Park ○ who is in charge of the violation of the Employment Security Act. They reported her fact. They reported her fact to around 20:0 on the same day with her 20:00 day. They reported her about how she was aware of the fact of the investigation by her her ○○○○○n in the future of the Defendant’s home country and her her her her her her her her her her her her her she was treated well. The Defendant reported her to her her her she from time to time to time by entering the South her police department and her her her her her her her her her local office.

피고인 은 다음 날20:00경 위 ○○노래방 앞길에서, 재차 찾아와 위 사건의 진행상황 을 묻는 윤 ○ 호 에게 "내가 얘기 잘 해놨으니까나중에 술이나 한 잔 사라."고 하면서 금품 을 요구 하여 , 그자리에서 피해자로부터 위 사건에 관한청탁을 한다는 명목 으로 현금 50 만 원 을 교부받았다.

B. From 22:00 on the day following the day of the crime described in the above paragraph 2, Defendant received entertainment from 00 ○○○○○○○-ro ○○○○○○-ro ○○○○○, with regard to the above case described in paragraph 2(a), with regard to alcoholic beverages and entertainment services worth KRW 13,33 won in total as the market price for the above case from ○○○-○○-ro ○○-ro 2’s solicitation. The Defendant received entertainment from 20:0 on the day after the day of the crime described in paragraph 2(b) above 20:0,000, 000 ○○-Ga 2’s 2’s 00-Ga-Ga Ga-Ga 1, 200, 2000, 2000, 300,000, 300,000,000).

3. A person who habitually commits violence;

A. At the first half of 2016, Defendant 2 operated an entertainment drinking house of 000 00,000, Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, 000, 000, and knew that he is engaged in illegal commercial sex acts by employing foreign women, such as Thailand and Chinese nationality, he/she shall call to the victim for the above '○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○.

B. Defendant 20 years of age, ○○○○○○○○ (hereinafter “○○○○”). From 50 days of age, Defendant 1 got a total of KRW 800,000,000 for 10,000,000,000 for 5 months of age, 6 months of age, and 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00,00,00,00.

4. On October 13, 2018, Defendant 1 knew of the fact that the maximum victim (the age of 68) stated the Defendant’s statement of damage on the charge of habitual assault at the Ulsan District Police Agency’s metropolitan investigation team, and attempted to reverse the above statement made by the victim and to threaten the victim to make a false statement at an investigative agency by putting the fact that the victim provided the place of sexual traffic.

A. At around October 20, 2018, around 00:55, the Defendant: (a) at the information room of Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S. ○○○○, the victim’s maximum ○○, “O -000,” which is located in 00, the victim’s ○○○○○○○○. The Defendant examined that the Defendant was investigated. It does not commit murder; (b) the Defendant did not commit murder; and (c) the Defendant was able to look at the Defendant’s money with imprisonment; and (d) the Defendant did not control the Defendant by sexual traffic; (c) the Defendant was able to stop the business for three months; and (c) the marbling of the same dead person is not aware of all the reported persons; and (d) the Defendant was subject to tax imposition and exemption of tax imposed upon the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim with the purpose of retaliation against the victim's statement in relation to the investigation of his criminal case.

B. At around October 2018, at the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, the wife of the above ○○○○○○○, the Defendant made a false statement during that period of why he stated that he had her made a false statement? The Defendant was aware of her so that she would have her her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son her son. B, her her son her son her son her son her so called a soft her son her son her son her son her son her son her son. The Defendant made a statement to the effect that her her her son her son her her son her son her her son her her son her her her son her her her her.

Application of Acts and Subordinate Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions and selection of punishment on the facts of crime;

Article 5-9(2) and (1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 351 and 350(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 298 of the Criminal Act, Article 111(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act (to receive money and valuables under the name of solicitation, and choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes in the punishment prescribed for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is the largest punishment in this case)

1. Additional collection:

Attorney 116 (Ex Post Facto)

1. The proviso to Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Exempted Sexual Crimes under the Order to Completion (Extent of indecent acts by compulsion, criminal records, etc. of the accused);

1. Orders for disclosure, orders for notification, and exemption from employment restrictions orders;

○ Exemption from an order to disclose or notify: Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Articles 49(1) proviso and 50(1) proviso of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

○ Exemption from Employment Restriction Order: Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018); Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018); the proviso to Article 56 (1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018); Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15452, Dec. 11, 2018); the reasons under the proviso to Article 59-3 (1) of the Welfare of Persons with Disabilities Act: The defendant has no history of punishment for sexual crimes; the defendant's age, occupation, risk of repeating the crime in this case; the process of the crime; the disclosure and notification of personal information of the victim;

1. Determination on the charge of forced indecent act (Article 1 of the judgment)

A. Summary of the assertion

1) Since the victim AO ○ expressed his/her intention not to punish the Defendant, this part of the indictment should be dismissed. 2) While the Defendant was at the time, he/she was able to write the victim’s hand and write the victim’s hand, rhys, and rhys, he/she did not use his/her body, and she did not have any intention to commit indecent act.

B. Determination

1) Legal principles

The crime of indecent act by force includes not only the case where an indecent act is committed after the other party makes it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation, but also the case where the assault itself is deemed an indecent act. In this case, the assault does not necessarily require that it is sufficient to suppress the other party's intention, and as long as the exercise of force against the other party's will is against the other party's will, it is not a exaggeration of the force.

The indecent act is an act that causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to good sexual morality, and thus infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it is so determined should be carefully and carefully taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the perpetrator and the victim before that time, circumstances leading to the act, specific circumstances surrounding the act, and sexual morality in the age (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002). It is not reasonable to charge the Defendant with an indecent act on the part of the victim’s defense counsel’s body, such as the victim’s statement, without permission of the victim’s sexual humiliation or aversion. As such, the provision of Article 306 of the former Criminal Act was amended by Act No. 11574, Dec. 18, 2012; thus, the victim’s assertion that it was legitimate to dismiss the Defendant’s body and the victim’s defense counsel’s allegation that it occurred after that date.

In light of the fact that there is no essential difference (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do52, Apr. 16, 2004). (4) In the crime of indecent act under the Criminal Act, the term “indecent act” in the Criminal Act is objectively an act that causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to the good sexual moral sense, and thus, the victim’s sexual freedom is infringed upon. As such, the subjective sexual humiliation or satisfaction of the actor does not constitute the elements for the crime of indecent act by compulsion. (5) The victim is deemed to have caused the victim’s inconvenience and sense of shame as an indecent act under the Criminal Act, and the intent of indecent act is also acknowledged. Accordingly, this part of the defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion is without merit.

A. Summary of the assertion

Defendant was informed of the fact that the Ulsan Regional Police Agency would regulate news agencies, and the head of the Sinsan Regional Police Agency attempted to offer money to the Defendant at the time of the police control, but refused this. Defendant 2-A(c) did not receive money from the head of the Sinsan Regional Police Agency, as described in the paragraph (d).

As stated in the judgment of the court below No. 2, the payment of the price is paid by 00,000 won, but since the payment of the price is paid by 00,000 won as stated in the judgment of the court below, 40,000 won for entertainment that received with 00,000 won and 00 won for drinking together with 0,000 won.

1) According to the following facts and circumstances revealed by each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court at this court’s discretion, the Defendant may be deemed to have received money as stated in Article 2(a), (c), and (d) of the Decision 2-A. C. The Defendant’s argument that the Defendant and his defense counsel are not acceptable.

① Without being experienced in police investigations conducted on a total of three occasions, including a face-to-face newspaper with the Defendant, leap-ho-ho refers to the circumstances in which the Defendant first becomes aware of the fact that he was going to know (as from the Defendant, the fact that he was going to know about her will by the police). The Defendant stated specifically and consistently on the following: (a) the process in which she became aware of the fact that she was going to know about her will; and (b) the time and amount in which she paid money to the Defendant.

② Park Dong-ho’s Republic of Korea transferred the fact that the police’s internal intent to ○ Ho was in progress by the Defendant, and notified it to ○○○.In addition to leap, there was a fact of finding the Defendant. It stated to the purport that she was able to find the Defendant. It was consistent with the statement of leap that she was able to listen to the fact that she was in progress with her internal investigation to her country, and that she was her back to her country and sought Defendant.

③ At the time of the second protocol of interrogation of the police, Defendant stated to the effect that ○○ was unaware of the fact that she was killed of the fact at the time of the preparation of the second protocol of interrogation of the police, and that she first asked her to find himself/herself and her to help him/ her be killed in the police, and that she asked her to do so. When preparing the fourth protocol of interrogation of the police officer, Defendant 4 told her talking about her talking about her news, and transferred her statement to her her her scam with the knowledge of the fact that she tried to deliver money to her.” The Defendant did not make a consistent statement as to the reasons why ○○ knew knew of the fact that she was aware of her internal investigation.

④ During the fourth police interrogation protocol preparation process, Defendant 1 stated that she first met ○’s No. 1, and found her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers her hers her hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers hers her.).

In a case where a person who has received a bribe gives entertainment along with the accepter and the amount required for the acceptance of the bribe was paid by the accepter, the amount required for the acceptance of the bribe should first be recognized, and the amount should be the amount of the accepted bribe with the former's amount consumed by the accepter. If the amount of expenses required by the accepter is unclear, it should be equally divided and recognized as the amount of the accepted bribe (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do5294 delivered on October 12, 2001, etc.). This legal principle does not seem to be a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do1487 delivered on August 24, 1982). In light of this legal principle, Defendant 30,000 won for the instant case's health, Defendant 1, 2, 300,000 won for entertainment service, and Defendant 40,000 won for which the amount of the divided entertainment was calculated.

3. Determination as to the habitually Meritorious (Article 3 of the judgment below)

A. Summary of the assertion

1) Paragraph 3-A of the Decision

Around 2017, Defendant 2 proposed to “The payment of KRW 2.5 million per month from the next side of the business to make an investment of KRW 20 million to Defendant 2,50,000,000 to Defendant 3-4,000 from March 20, 2017 to August 20, 201, Defendant 3-B of the holding that “The amount of KRW 20,000,000 from the next side of the business to make an investment of KRW 2,50,000 per month” was remitted to Defendant 3-B of the holding that: (a) from March 20, 2017 to August 20, 201, Defendant received KRW 34,000 from Defendant ○○○; and (b) there was no fact that Defendant 2 received KRW 45,00,00 in the name of the protection expense from Defendant Kim ○

Article 3-3-3 (C) of the Decision, 200,000 won, 7,000 won, 7,000 won, 7,000 won, 50,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000 won, 20,000,000 won, etc., 20,000,00

In relation to each criminal fact stated in the attached list of crimes, there is no fact that the defendant raised money from the victim as follows.

B. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

Intimidation as a means of the crime of threat refers to the threat of harm and injury that is likely to be frighten to restrict the freedom of decision-making or obstruct the freedom of decision-making, and the threat of harm and injury is sufficient if it is sufficient to have the other party recognize that the other party would be suffering from any harm and injury by language or operation without necessarily required to do so, and even if it is not directly or indirectly, it may be indirectly made through the third party other than the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is not the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the other, and if the other party does not comply with such a request, it shall be a malicious notice even in cases where the perpetrator delivers the goods by using illegally the above taxes based on his occupation, status, bad character and behavior, experience, etc., and requests the other party to gain profits from the property and if the other party does not comply with such request, it shall be a bad faith notice (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do1565.22).

In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence examined by this court, the defendant can be recognized as taking property by threatening the victims as described in Paragraph 3 of the ruling.This part of the arguments by the defendant and his defense counsel is not accepted.

① As seen below, in light of the statements made by the victims of habitual conflicts of this case, including the victim Kim Jong-chul and the witness, the Defendant may have a threat of harm and injury to the victim Kim Jong-sik, if he did not comply with his demand by his excessive status, such as the relative with the police officer, due to his excessive influence.

The victims of habitual conflicts, including the victim Kim Jong-ok, stated that they were common to investigative agencies and this court as if they were influences with the police officers, and that they were friendly with the police officers. The other business places of the defendant are well influences without regulating several years, and that if they were not influent with the defendant's demand, they made a statement to the effect that they would be likely to be disadvantaged by the defendant." The defendant did not know that they were influent with the victim's speech and behavior, and that they would be disadvantaged by the defendant's refusal of the defendant's demand, and that they were influent with the witness's right to know that they were influences, and that they did not know that they were influent with the police officer's order and that they were influent with the witness's order. The defendant did not know that they were influent with the defendant's order.

From the investigative agency to this court, the victim Ge-gu rejected twice or twice from the person's house when he was asked to invest shares from the Defendant in early 2016, but the Defendant consented to the Defendant's proposal without any choice by giving him a 's play closed due to the control of sexual traffic around September 2016, 201,' and prepared a cash loan certificate at the Defendant's request, and around February 20, 2017, 18 times in total after receiving KRW 20 million from the Defendant, 45 million through 18 times in total.'

③ Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant was paid a total of KRW 34 million each month in return for the Defendant’s investment of KRW 20 million in the victim Kim Jong-dong. However, even according to the above assertion, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s receipt of KRW 34 million in total exceeding KRW 20 million during the 18-month period from March 20, 2017 to August 20, 2018 without any specific agreement on investment, as a result of ordinary human transaction, for 18 months from around 20, 2017 to around 20, 2018.

① As seen earlier, the Defendant informed the victim Kim ○ of the harm and injury that, in the event that the Defendant did not comply with his/her demand due to excessive conditions, such as friendship with the police officer, he/she may cause unreasonable disadvantages to the victim Kim ○.

② From the investigative agency to this court, the victim Kim Jong-pon demanded that the other company be able to carry out funeral services for a few years without regulating it, and any company demanded that it regulate it, and the victim Kim Jong-pon demanded that it be 1 million won per month. The victim Kim Jong-pon was 10 million won per month. The victim's 80% of the 80% of the son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son.

③ According to the telephone calls between Defendant and the victim Kim ○, the Defendant 1 was able to call the victim about a total of about 105 times in a year, and the Defendant 10,000 won during a period of about 10 years. “Once the Defendant received 10 phone calls from the Defendant, she would drink 7 times in accordance with the Defendant’s demand, and 50,000 won in cash at each time.” On the basis of the Defendant’s statement of the victim Kim ○, the Defendant was able to contact the victim Kim ○ for about 105 times in a year, and 50,000 won in total over 74 times in a period of about 70%, and 370,000 won in total from around 26, 2016 to October 6, 2018, the Defendant 300,000 won in total from around 660,000 won in each month to around 306,000 won in each month (i.

C) Part 3-C of the holding

① In relation to the facts stated in attached Table 1, 3, 7, 8, 13, and 14 on the list of crimes against ○○○○○, the victim Kim Jong-dong expressed his money like the facts stated in the list of crimes on the crime at issue, in a consistent manner, from an investigative agency to an investigation agency to this court, the victim Kim Jong-dae expressed his money to report and control the Defendant without any threat that he would report and control the Defendant.

② 피해자김* 현 에 대한 별지 범죄일람표 2항 기재 범죄사실과 관련하여, 피해자 김 * 현 은 수사 기관에서 이 법정에 이르기까지 '평소 피고인이 경찰, 국정원에서 의 근무 경력 을 내세 오며 경찰관들 과친분이 있는 것처럼 과시하였기 때문에, 피고인에게 밉보 이면 피고인 이 경찰에 신고하는 방법으로 괴롭히는 등 불이익을 당할 것을 우려하여 종업원 인 이 ○ 호가 피고인에게 10만 원 을 주는 것을 묵인하였고, 이후 자신이 이이호 에게 다시 10 만 원을 주었다.'고 일관되게 진술하였다. 피고인 과 변호인은 단순히 부의금조로 10만 원 을 받은 것일 뿐 피해자 김 * 현을 협박 한 사실 은 없다고 주장하나, 피고인 이 평소 피해자 김 * 현 을 비롯한 피해자 들에게 자신 의 위세 를과시하며 자신의 요구에 불응할 경우 불이익을 가할 것처럼 행동하였다 는 점 을 고려 하면 피해자 김 *현이자신의 의사로 피고인에게 위 금원을 주었다.고 보기 는 어렵다.

③ On December 2, 2017, in relation to the facts stated in [Attachment 4 and 11] of the victim’s maximum number of crimes, the victim’s maximum investigation agency and this court, and the defendant demanded medical expenses while drinking alcohol and drinking for the victim. If the defendant did not pay medical expenses, the defendant would have reported and controlled the singing room on the first floor of the telecom and the telecomto, which the defendant operates." The defendant provided another telecom to the police, and the defendant stated consistently to the purport that “The defendant would have his 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 own her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her

④ With respect to the facts stated in the separate sheet 5 and 6 against the victim Kim Jong-ok stated that "the victim Kim Jong-W" in this court would not improve if it appears well by the defendant, and that the defendant would be able to fit the control if he did not drink, fright, and 10 times well." At this ordinary time, the victim Kim Jong-Woo stated that "at this time, he did not put the defendant at a disadvantage against the defendant, even if he did not put the defendant at a disadvantage, he did not make the defendant make the above investigation as stated in the separate sheet 60, 8, 100, 9, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 10, and 10,000, 10,000, 10, and 10,000, 10,000, 20, etc., 20.

6) Regarding the facts constituting the crime listed in attached Table 3, 7, 8, 12, 13, and 14, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the amount equally divided by the number of persons, including those who drink drinking, as the Defendant, should be considered as the amount that the Defendant repied by the Defendant. However, in the crime of extortion, the amount of repied shall be deemed to be the total amount of the amount that the Defendant and his defense counsel provided by threatening the victim. Thus, this part of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion is without merit.

4. Determination on the violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Intimidation, Intimidation, etc.) (Article 4)

A. Summary of the assertion

Defendant 1, who was under the police investigation of this case, resisted that he was able to speak to the highest ○○ of the victim and his early accommodation as a fact. However, there was no fact that the victims threatened as stated in the judgment No. 4.

B. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

In the crime of intimidation, the expression of harm that may cause fear to a person generally refers to a threat of harm that is likely to cause fear. As such, the expression of subjective constituent elements of the crime is not necessary to recognize that the perpetrator knows that the perpetrator informss of harm to such a degree, citing it, and actually realizes the harm that the perpetrator notified. However, if the perpetrator's expression of the perpetrator is merely merely an expression of temporary dispersion within a simple emotional brut, and it is objectively evident that the perpetrator has no intent to harm in light of surrounding circumstances, it is not necessary to recognize the act of intimidation or intimidation. However, whether there was an intent of intimidation or intimidation should be determined by comprehensively considering not only the appearance of the act, but also the circumstances leading to such act, and surrounding circumstances, such as the victim's relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 205Do3296, Mar. 25, 2005; 2006Do4656, Aug. 6, 2006).

Meanwhile, whether there was the purpose of retaliation against the Defendant ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account various objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s behavior and the victim’s character, character and behavior characteristics of the Defendant, the likelihood of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do90302, Sept. 26, 2014) by responding to the Defendant’s response against the act of the victim subject to retaliation, changes in the attitude in the process of investigation or trial after the crime, provision of an investigation report, etc., the details and degree of disadvantage suffered by the Defendant, including the background leading the Defendant and the victim at the time of the crime, surrounding environment including the time and place of the crime, etc., the method and method of the crime including the use of a deadly weapon, etc., the contents and form of the crime, the provision of an investigation report, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do90302, Sept. 26, 2014).

In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence examined by this Court, the Defendant may be recognized as having threatened each other with the victim’s highest ○○ and Cho Jong-○ as stated in the ruling, for the purpose of retaliation against the investigation of his criminal case. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion are not acceptable.

① At the investigation agency and this court, the victim’s maximum ○ and ○○ consistently made a statement that “the Defendant made a statement and made intimidation, such as the statement of the crime No. 4 in its holding.”

② As seen earlier, the Defendant notified the victims of any disadvantage or harm at any time when the Defendant did not comply with the Defendant’s demand, and demanded the victims to pay money at any time. Considering the following circumstances: the Defendant’s character and conduct and conduct characteristics, the relationship with the victims, and the background leading up to the Defendant’s finding the victims who made a statement of damage in connection with the investigation of the criminal case against himself/herself, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant threatened the victims for the purpose of retaliation.

1. Grounds for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of up to 45 years;

2. The scope of recommending sentences according to the sentencing standards.

(a) One crime (Habitual violence);

[Determination of Type] Crimes of Assault 02. Habitual Rape, Special Rape, and Habitual Rape (Type 1)

[Special Sentencings] Mitigations: In a case where punishment is not granted or a significant damage is recovered;

[Scope of Recommendation and Recommendation] Reduction Area, 6 months to 2 years of imprisonment

(b) Second offense (violation of the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes Act).

[Determination of Type] Violence Crimes 04. Intimidation [Type 5] Intimidation

[Special Sentencing factors] Mitigation factors: In a case where punishment is not imposed (including serious efforts for the recovery of damage), or where considerable damage has been recovered;

[Scope of Recommendations and Recommendations] Reduction Area, 4 months to 1 year and 4 months. 3 Crimes (Compulsory Indecent Acts)

[Determination of Type] The General Standard 01.B. The crime of indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act (type 1)

[Special Sentencings] Mitigation elements: In a case where the exercise of tangible power is considerably weak, if the degree of indecent act is weak, it is not punishable.

[Scope of Recommendation and Recommendation] Special Mitigation Area, one month to one year of imprisonment

(d) Scope of recommending punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: Six months to three years of imprisonment (the upper limit of the first crime + the upper limit of the second crime + 1/2 + 1/3 of the upper limit of the third crime).

(e) Scope of the recommended type of punishment revised according to the applicable sentencing group: One year to three years (in cases where the lower limit of the sentence range recommended by the sentencing criteria is inconsistent with the lower limit of the applicable sentencing group in law, it shall be based on the lower limit of the applicable sentencing group in law);

3. The case’s decision of sentence is that the defendant had a past career or fluordial relationship with the police, and even if the defendant did not comply with his request, he reported to the police and puts the case at a disadvantage to the victims who run entertainment establishments or the entertainmentel, etc., thereby habitually taking money and valuables, received money in the name of the police’s solicitation, threatened the victims who stated in connection with the investigation of his criminal case, and made indecent act by force.

In the case of forced indecent acts, most of the victims of indecent acts do not focus on the degree of indecent acts and do not want to be punished against the accused, such as the crime of habitual assault and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, ○○, Mala, Mala, Mala, Kim ○, and Mana, which are favorable to the accused.

① However, as revealed in the investigative agency and the court’s statement, the victims were unlikely to engage in entertainment business with a weak and bad behavior, and the suffering of the victims seems to have been seriously affected above the upper and upper level. ② It seems that there were business concerns that the victims were sufferings such as serious shocks or threats caused by the repetition of the defendants, or psychological chills, and that there was an intention to start the business or think of the closure of the business. ③ Nevertheless, the investigation agency and the court do not completely reflect the fact that the victims were consistently punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a certain period of time, such as the victims’ statement, the Defendant’s ordinary behavior, and the attitude of attending the trial, and whether the victims were punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a similar period of time, and whether the victims were punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a similar period of time, and whether the victims were suspected of being punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a more than 7 years after the victim’s petition, and whether the victims were punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a certain period of time and other similar factors that might not be agreed.

In addition, Defendant Ghana, personality and conduct, family relationship, environment, motive, means, circumstances, etc. after committing the crime are comprehensively considered in the records of the case and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the pleading, and the sentence is determined as per Disposition. Personal information is registered and submitted.

Where a conviction on the forced indecent act crime in the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information in accordance with Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and the defendant is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency in accordance with Article 43 of the same Act.

Defendant’s personal information registration period is 20 years pursuant to Articles 45(1)2 and 45(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes. However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the period of registration of personal information registration is a longer short-term period than that of the sentence of sentence B; and (b) the registration period is 15 years pursuant to Article 45(4) of the same Act, in accordance with Article 45(4) of the same Act.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged;

Defendant 2’s entertainment tavern ○○○○○○○○○, located on a ○○-ro, Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, ○○○, on the day following the day on which the crime described in paragraph (1) of Article 2 of the judgment was committed. In relation to the case described in paragraph (1) of the above Article, the Defendant received entertainment by receiving alcoholic beverages and entertainment services equivalent to KRW 400,00 in the name of solicitation of the above case from leaphohoho-ho, and received entertainment in relation to the case described in paragraph (2) of the above Article.

2. Determination

The facts of this part of the public prosecution are as follows: (a) within the scope exceeding KRW 133,33,00, as seen in the part of 2.B. (2) of the judgment on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel; and (b) within the scope exceeding KRW 133,333,00, there is no proof of a crime; and (c) thus, a not-guilty verdict should be rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act; (d) however, as long as the court found the defendant guilty of the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act due to the offering

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Park Young-young

Judges Kim Do-young

Judge Definition Binding

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.