2014 Highest 1638 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

Factory bed)

A

Maximum police officer's rank, Lee Jin-hun (Public trial)

Attorney B

September 16, 2015

The defendant shall be innocent.

Indictment

On July 6, 2014, at around 21:10, the Defendant came in front of the public toilets near the D cafeteria located in Seojin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City on July 6, 2014, the Defendant: (a) entered the toilet to view the tiltile; and (b) entered the toilet through an open toilet door to satisfy his sexual desire; and (c) entered the part immediately right side of the partitions to satisfy the victim’s sexual desire, and pushed the head into the space between the partitions. Ultimately, the Defendant infringed on the public toilets with a view to satisfy his sexual desire.

1. Summary of the defendant's assertion

Since the public toilets in the vicinity of the D cafeteria (hereinafter referred to as the "the toilet in this case") stated in the facts charged do not constitute public toilets, etc. under subparagraphs 1 through 5 of Article 2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes, since the toilet in this case does not constitute public toilets, etc. under Article 12 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes, the facts charged in this case on the premise that the toilet in this case falls under the "public toilets, etc.

2. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court as to whether the toilet of this case constitutes “public toilets, etc.”, the toilet of this case is installed in the middle of the stairs going to the second floor of the billiard of the building outside the left part of the cafeteria, and is open at the commencement of the business and is closed upon the completion of the business (17:00 to 00 on the following day). Thus, it can be acknowledged that the toilet of this case can be used even without the cafeteria because it does not separately manage the business (17:0 to 04:0 on the following day).

Meanwhile, according to Article 2 of the Public Toilets, etc. Act, the term "public toilets, etc." means public toilets 1 ① (the State, local governments, corporations, or individuals are installed to provide for public use), ② public toilets (the toilets installed in the facilities of public institutions, open for public use, or toilets designated by the Governor of a Special Self-Governing Province, the head of a Si, the head of a Gun, or the head of a Gu pursuant to Article 9(2)), ③ mobile toilets (the toilets installed in an area where multiple people gather) and ④ pay toilets (the small toilets installed in an area where it is difficult to install public toilets), ⑤ Pay toilets (the toilets installed in which the manager of a toilet can collect user fees from the user of the public toilets). In addition, the above Act imposes on the State and local governments the responsibility to prepare measures necessary for the designation and management of public toilets so that the public can use them in order to enhance the convenience and sanitation level of the public, and it is reasonable to designate a manager who manages the public toilets in accordance with the standards for the management of public toilets in this case.

Therefore, it is difficult to view the toilet of this case as falling under the "public toilet, etc." subject to the above law, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, and thus, it is decided to sentence the defendant not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judges Laos.