Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

around 10:00 on May 28, 2016, the Defendant, at the bus stops in front of the Dobong-gu Seoul apartment complex, talked with the victim “a person who does so like the victim,” and talked with the victim “a person who does so” in order to commit an indecent act against the victim’s D (the age of 58) who was known to the city of Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. The Defendant got off the victim’s hand and bucks and bucks so that the Defendant was able to talk about the victim’s hand and bucks, and carried the victim with the shoulder.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed an indecent act on the part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

1. Article 298 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 298 of the Selection of Punishment Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed to Order;

1. In full view of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, occupation, family environment, social ties, criminal record and risk of recidivism, profits and preventive effects expected due to the instant disclosure order and notification order, disadvantages and side effects, etc., there are special circumstances in which the Defendant’s personal information may not be disclosed or notified.

(C) The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant was physically and mentally deprived or physically weak at the time of the instant crime.

In light of various circumstances, such as the background and means of the crime committed by each of the above evidence, the details of the crime, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime in this case, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.

The reason for sentencing.