Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 20:00 on January 5, 2014, the Defendant ordered the victim E (here, 16 years of age) who is an employee at the “D” store located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, to take the victim’s arms, and forced the victim to commit an indecent act by force, such as her son and her son, and her son’s son’s son’s son’s son and her son’s son’s son’s son.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of victim E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each witness's written statement in F, G and H;

1. Article 7 (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and Article 298 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The main sentence of Article 21 (2) and Article 21 (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. Article 49 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. Whether a case constitutes “where it is deemed that there exist any special circumstances that would not give notice of personal information” as prescribed by the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, occupation, and risk of recidivism, characteristics of the offender, such as the type of the offense, motive, process, result, seriousness of the offense, etc., characteristics of the offense, such as the crime, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entry due to the notification order, the preventive effect of the sexual crime subject to registration, and the effect of protecting the victim from the sexual crime subject

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do16863, Feb. 23, 2012). Before all, the Defendant had no record of punishment for sexual assault crimes.