2018Ma173 Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act, etc.);

Injury, Child Welfare Violation (Child Abuse)

A

Maximum ice (prosecution) and Kim Jong-chul (public trial)

Law Firm Lee Hask

[Defendant-Appellee]

November 9, 2018

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 20,000,000.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Of the charged facts of this case, the charged facts of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Acts such as Fraudulent Means, etc.) and violation of the Child Welfare Act (Child Abuse) against the victim B are not guilty.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a teacher of the first year OO middle school in Gwangju, who was in office as a teacher of the first year OB, and the victims are students of the first year in the above schools.

1. Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

On July 20, 2017, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force on the part of the victim B (the family name, female, 13 years old) who was seated on the left side by pressing the body to the left part while showing the ‘stalman' film to the students during the moral class hours of the above school on July 20, 2017. The Defendant committed an indecent act by force on the part of the juvenile as a student under the protection and supervision of the Defendant as a teacher of the left side buckbuck part of the victim two times in his hand, and then committed an indecent act on the part of the juvenile as a student under the protection and supervision of the Defendant, from September 2017 until September 2017.

2. Violation of the Child Welfare Act (or abuse) and injury;

피고인은 2017. 4. 13. 08:50경 위 학교 1학년 O반 교실에서 조회 중 피해자 C(가명, 13세)이 "쌤 쉬어요"라고 말하면서 일어났다는 이유로 화가 나 손에 들고 있는 나무막대기(길이 약 30cm)로 피해자의 왼팔을 강하게 1회 때려 피해자에게 약 2주간의 치료가 필요한 좌측주관절 타박상을 가함과 동시에 아동인 피해자의 신체에 손상을 주는 학대행위를 하였다.

3. Violation of the Child Welfare Act;

At around 08:50 on April 13, 2017, the Defendant: (a) even though the inquiry was not yet completed by the victim D (the age of 13) among the inquiries in the class of the first-class class class class class of the said school, the Defendant took several times the victim’s amblock ( approximately 30cm in length) with his hand on the ground that he tried to go out of the classroom; and (b) abused the victim’s body when the victim gets her grandchildren to prevent them from doing so by her hand, thereby impairing the victim’s body.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of C, B, E, F, G, H, D, and I;

1. The serial number and the serial number of each video recording;

1. Each police statement to J and K;

1. Submission of investigative data, certificate of employment, meeting minutes of the institution in exclusive charge of school violence, report on the results of investigation into the cases of school violence, report on the results of the autonomous committee for countermeasures against school violence, manual related to physical punishment, diagnosis document, and paper of investigation into actual conditions of school violence;

1. An investigation report (referring to the LM and its mother and telephone call), an investigation report (related to the father and father of M and the refusal to conduct an investigation, telephone and M) and an investigation report (Attachment to the right of separate publication in L Middle School);

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 7(5) and (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, Article 298 of the Criminal Act (a indecent act against children and juveniles by force), Article 71(1)2 and Article 17 subparag. 3 of the Child Welfare Act (a point of physical abuse against children), Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (a point of injury)

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act / Articles 40 and 50 (Child Welfare Violation (Child Abuse) Crimes against Victims C and Punishment for Serious Bodily Injury Crimes)

1. Selection of punishment;

Selection of each fine

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment and concurrent punishment provided for in the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) against victims D with the largest punishment, shall be aggravated, but the lowest punishment shall be determined by the punishment provided for in the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Acts, etc.))

1. Order to complete programs;

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

1. Orders to disclose and notify information and exemption from employment restrictions orders;

The proviso of Article 49(1), the proviso to Article 50(1), and the proviso to Article 56(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the defendant's completion of a sexual assault treatment program is deemed to have considerable effect to prevent recidivism, taking into account all the circumstances such as the background leading up to the crime, circumstances after the crime, benefits and preventive effects expected by the disclosure and notification order, and employment restriction order, disadvantage and side effects of the defendant's personal information, it is determined that there are special circumstances where the disclosure and notification of the defendant's personal information should not be made, and the employment restriction order should not be issued).

1. Invitation of a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Summary of the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion

A. The Defendant did not have any contact with the victims as stated in the facts of the crime No. 1 in the judgment, and even if there was a physical contact between the victims, it was committed by the Defendant, as a life guidance teacher, in the process of inducing and admonishing the victims who are students, and it was not committed for the motive or purpose of obtaining sexual satisfaction.

B. Although there is a fact that the Defendant committed the same act as the facts stated in paragraphs (2) and (3) of the crime committed by the Defendant, it is committed in the guidance of the victims, which constitutes a legitimate act permissible under social norms, and thus, the illegality is excluded.

2. Determination

For the following reasons, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is not accepted.

A. Criminal No. 1

1) Whether the defendant committed an act identical to the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court

A) Relevant legal principles

In a case where the statements of witnesses, including the victims, are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, they shall not be rejected without permission, unless there is any other evidence that is objectively deemed highly reliable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7403, Sept. 9, 2010).

B) Considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, it is recognized that the Defendant committed the act as described in paragraph (1) of the crime committed by the Defendant.

(1) The victims are consistently stated in the investigative agency and this court in detail at the time of physical contact with the following purport, such as the situation at which the Defendant was made, the statement by the Defendant, the method of physical contact with the Defendant, and the assessment of a pipe at the time. The contents of the statement include detailed matters that could not be known unless

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

(2) Although the victims’ statements are somewhat inconsistent to the investigation agency and this court, considering the fact that they were students of the first-year course of the middle school at the time of the instant case, they are merely due to the lack of expression, etc., or due to the possibility of making only a simple statement without any actual experience in the investigation process or due to the limitation of memory according to the passage of time, so long as the victims’ statements are consistently stated in the main part, it is difficult to dismiss the credibility of the victims’ statements.

(3) Although the Defendant submitted the materials that seem to be inconsistent with the statements of the victims in an investigative agency and this court (the evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, investigation records, one right 467, 469 through 478 submitted by the Defendant to this court), most of the above materials did not commit an indecent act against another student of the ○○ Middle School, another student of the ○○ School without the premise of the specific situation, or the defendant was not aware of the credibility of the above victims’ statements by using a written confirmation, written application, etc., and written a survey to the effect that the above victim’s statement was not slicked. Meanwhile, during the investigation process, the number of students of the ○○ Middle School No. 144 was 2). As a result, the 15 female students were stated as “a teacher who assaulted a student not for a sexual indecent act or educational purpose,” and the victim B and the student like the victim showed that most of the students were "the defendant's right to answer to the investigation records" (the 2).

(4) The defendant and his defense counsel argued that the defendant sent obscenity link to the victim E and the victim F, which is not good for the victim with regard to the disciplinary action against school violence, and that the victim did not report the victim's obscenity to the victim so that they could make a false report. In fact, the victim's statement that it was false or known that it was not sexually indecent act or educational purpose during the child-friendly question? But it is difficult to say that the victim's statement was made to the police station of this case and that the victim's statement of this case was made to the victim's 3th day after the victim's statement of this case, and that the victim's statement of this case was made to the victim's 4th day after the victim's statement and the victim's statement of this case was made to the victim's 3th day after the victim's statement of this case, and that the victim's statement of this case was made to the victim's 4th day after the victim's statement and the victim's statement of this case's body.

2) Whether the defendant's act constitutes an indecent act, and whether the defendant has an intention to commit an indecent act

A) Relevant legal principles

An 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 an indecent act constitutes such an indecent act is determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship before the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to such an act, specific circumstances leading to such act, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual moral sense of that time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002; 2013Do5856, Sept. 26, 2013).

Whether an indecent act constitutes an indecent act shall be objectively determined on the basis of the general public, and shall not be based on the subjective sexual satisfaction of the perpetrator or the victim. However, an indecent act itself must constitute an act that may infringe on the victim’s sexual freedom, and thus, the intent of the victim is considered in specific circumstances to such extent.

However, this standard alone is not clear as to which degree of act constitutes an indecent act, and the standard to be most important is the body part (including the method of indecent act) subject to the indecent act. For example, the act of the perpetrator in contact with the physical parts of the victim with the high sexual public sense, such as the victim’s sexual organ, fucks, chest, bucks, tacks, tacks, and marine, without any inevitable reason, can be evaluated as contrary to the ordinary person’s sexual humiliation or sexual morality from the perspective of the general public, unless there are special circumstances.

In addition, the situation and context of the act that caused the indecent act should be considered in light of other factors such as the relation between the perpetrator and the victim, the reason why the perpetrator contacted the victim's body, the place where the act was committed, the content of communication between the perpetrator and the victim at the time, the subjective perception of the victim, the existence of any similar physical contact in the past, and the response of the victim, etc., are examined as to whether the perpetrator's act can be evaluated as contrary to the sense of sexual humiliation or awareness from the perspective of ordinary people.

In particular, such criteria have significant meaning in cases where the bodily part, which is the object of an indecent act, is a relatively low portion of sexual public sense (such as hand, arms, shoulder, etc.). This is because it is difficult to be evaluated as an indecent act in itself from the perspective of ordinary people by itself from the perspective of ordinary people, and it can be recognized as an indecent act only when the information on the situation and context of the act in question is met. Furthermore, such circumstance constitutes the content of the offense charged, and thus, the prosecutor bears the burden of proof, and the defendant’s interest should be determined if not proven.

On the other hand, the perception and intent that an indecent act is committed is recognized solely with the awareness and intent that the indecent act is committed, and it does not require any subjective motive or purpose to stimulate, promote, and satisfy the sexual desire (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do6791, Jan. 13, 2006; 2017Do3390, Jul. 18, 2017). Therefore, the perpetrator does not interfere with recognizing the intention of the indecent act solely on the basis that there was any other intention, such as a sense of friendship, encouragement, admonition, decoration, and dys.

B) Specific determination

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, even if there was no subjective motive or purpose to stimulate sexual desire to the Defendant, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant, at least, was aware that his act constitutes an objectively indecent act.

1) At the time, the victims were female students at middle schools of 13 years of age, and the Defendant became aware of the victims as teachers. In light of the victims’ age at the time of emotional and sexual identity and values formation, and the relationship between the victims and the Defendant, it does not appear that the victims are naturally and naturally in a personal relationship with the Defendant without any particular refusal.

2) The Defendant committed an act, such as taking charge of buckbucks, face, seeing, entering, and drinking. From the perspective of the general public, such an act is naturally allowed by means of forming trust between male teachers and female students, or of giving a decoration and decoration, or it is difficult to deem that such an act exists.

3) As seen earlier, the victims stated that “the Defendant’s act was distorted,” and “the part that was not good,” and had already revealed the Defendant’s unexpected sentiment regarding the Defendant’s act before reporting the instant case, and discussed the countermeasures. In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the victims did not accept the Defendant’s act as a general act that male teachers could make it available to female students at middle school or as a form of discipline and decoration.

B. Facts constituting the crime Nos. 2 and 3

1) Relevant legal principles

Article 18 (1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides that "the head of a school may discipline or instruct students by other means, as prescribed by Acts and subordinate statutes or school regulations, if necessary for education," and Article 20 (4) of the same Act provides that "a teacher shall educate students as prescribed by Acts and subordinate statutes." Article 31 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides that "the head of a school shall educate students, if deemed necessary for education pursuant to the main sentence of Article 18 (1) of the Act."

A disciplinary action falling under any of the following subparagraphs may be taken. 1. Social service work on March 3, 200: (a) special education is completed not more than 10 days, and not more than 30 days of attendance at school per year; and (b) Article 31(8) of the same Decree provides that “The head of a school shall provide guidance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 18(1) of the Act by methods such as discipline, discipline, etc., and shall not use methods of causing physical harm to a student’s body by using tools, body parts, etc., as prescribed by school regulations.”

Meanwhile, without notifying the student of the educational meaning, such as physical punishment, discipline, etc., due to the purpose of correction, whether it is a guidance act derived from the character of a guidance teacher or appraisal, or whether it is an act of guiding the student openly to the extent that he/she is a situation in which he/she can individually be directed and corrected by means of discipline and discipline in a place without any other person, or whether it is an act of guiding the student openly to the extent that he/she is an act of punishing and insulting the student, or an act of guiding the student by using articles dangerous to the student's body or health or the body of a guidance teacher, or by using the student's body, it is difficult to view that the student's act of guiding the student's physical injury is objectively reasonable in light of social norms, unless there are any special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5380, Jun. 10, 204).

2) Specific determination

A) In light of the fact that the above relevant legal principles and the head of the OO middle school stated that the physical punishment is prohibited (i.e., 322 pages of investigation records) in the body punishment-related domains submitted to an investigation agency (i.e., 352 pages of investigation records), and that the J of the same teachers also stated in the investigation agency that the above school's punishment is not permitted in entirety (i.e., 355 pages of investigation records), it appears that even if the defendant had the purpose of family correction, the acts such as the facts constituting the crime Nos. 2 and 3 in the

B) In addition, the victims made the following statements at the investigative agency and the court of this case with regard to the situation at the time of this case, and the defendant also made a significant statement at the investigative agency. It is difficult to recognize the objective validity in light of social norms as it appears that the defendant, who did not follow the direction of the teacher, was merely the victims who did not follow the direction of the teacher, and used violence, rather than because the act in the crime Nos. 2 and 3 of this case was committed for the purpose of correction.

(1) While the victim was placed on the level when he was still making an inquiry, the victim was intending to go to the toilet, and the defendant was able to avoid the victim's her arms and her arms while she 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 his her her her her her her but her her her her her her her her her her her her her

(2) The victim C went to the Ablue health room to the extent that the elbow was unable to move, and the health care worker ought to go to the hospital, and the Defendant was treated as a hospital. At the time, the Defendant attempted to go to the effect that he did not go to his own act, and that he would not know his parents to the victim C.

C) Therefore, the act as stated in the facts constituting a crime Nos. 2 and 3 as indicated in the holding cannot be deemed as a justifiable act as referred to in Article 20 of the Criminal Act, due to an act in violation of the statutes and an act difficult

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of 1000 to 75 million won; and

2. Determination of sentence 4);

Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant, a middle school teacher, commits an indecent act by force against the victim B, F, H, and G, who is a female student under his/her direction, and using the tree atmosphere to commit the crime against the victim C, the victim D, and the victim’s physical abuse from the Defendant. Also, the Defendant stated that the victim C, and D wished to punish the Defendant under this law.

However, in the crime of the indecent act in this case, the extent of the indecent act in this case was minor and the victims of the indecent act reported the wrong act in this court, but they stated that they are not subject to criminal punishment, and that there was no criminal record, the defendant's primary crime without any criminal record, and the defendant's life had been led faithfully to students' life in a relatively late age for 10 years, shall be considered as favorable circumstances, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime in this case, method and consequence of the crime in this case, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments and records shall be determined as per the disposition.

Registration of Personal Information

Where a conviction becomes final and conclusive on the facts constituting the crime stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article, the accused is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and thus, the accused is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act. [In light of the statutory punishment, the nature of the crimes other than the above crimes and the sex crimes subject to registration, and other circumstances revealed in the argument in this case, it is not recognized that the period of registration is determined in accordance with Article 45 (1)

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

(a) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

On July 28, 2017, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim F (the 13-year old age), who was gird in the second floor of the ○○ middle school, by committing an indecent act by force against the juvenile victim as a teacher, who was under the protection and supervision of the defendant as a student under the protection and supervision of the defendant, as well as by committing an indecent act against the juvenile victim by force during the period from September 28, 2017, such as the list Nos. 2 to 4, 9, 10, and 12 in the annexed crime list Nos. 2 to 4, 9, 12.

(b) Violation of the Child Welfare Act;

On July 24, 2017, the Defendant abused the victim’s body, who is a child, by stating that the victim B (a person, feld, 13 years of age) in the class of the first-year class class of the above school at night, referred him/her to “at night” to his/her her son at night, and she committed an act of abusing the victim’s body by stating that the victim’s shoulder part of the victim’s shoulder was frightened in his/her son, and that the victim’s entrance was "at one time any longer."

2. Summary of the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion

A. The summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant did not have contacted the victims’ body as stated in the facts charged; (b) even if there was a physical contact between the victims, this was committed by the Defendant, as a life guidance teacher, in the process of inducing and admonishing the victims who are the students; and (c) it was not committed for the motive or purpose of obtaining sexual satisfaction.

B. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant, in the circumstances described in Paragraph (b) above, committed a cruel act that inflicts bodily harm on the victim who is a child, on the ground that there was no fact at the time when the victim B was involved, and thus, did not constitute a cruel act.

3. Determination

A. Summary of the facts charged

1) Whether the Defendant committed an act identical to the description of the facts charged

The victims are consistently described in the investigative agency and this court that they met the body of the victim F, victim B, and the victim H, who the defendant was walking on in the corridor, etc. (attached Table 2, 9, and 11) with the shoulder and the arms of the above victims, the victim F, and the victim H by one hand, and other hand, and they met (attached Table 3 and 4) with the victim's hand during the class period, during the class period, and the victim's head was written in his hand (attached Table 10), and the victim's head was written in the manner of exposing the victim's head in his hand (attached Table 10). As seen earlier, it is recognized that the defendant's act as described in the summary of the facts charged was committed, since there is no reason to reject the credibility of the statement.

2) Whether the defendant's act constitutes an indecent act, and whether the defendant has an intention to commit an indecent act

A) Nos. 2 through 4, 9, and 12 of the annexed list of crimes;

(1) Unlike the physical parts of the body parts, such as bucks, bucks, bucks, and ships, the physical parts of the body parts such as hand and arms, as well as the physical parts of the body parts, such as hand and arms, should be recognized as having caused physical contact in a sexual way through the situation at the time, method and place of the defendant's physical contact, and communication between the defendant and the victim. However, the victim F, the victim H, and the victim B have consistently made a statement about the fact that the defendant had physical contact. However, in any context at the time, they did not make a proper statement, such as whether the defendant had such contact with the body.

(2) The actual defendant appears to have a corridor most of the places where the defendant met the arms of the above victims or knife them. As alleged by the defendant, there is a relatively minor physical contact, such as that the defendant had a physical contact with a trial decision in the process of walking a large number of female students, or that the defendant, a life instructor, while making a speech to the above victims in relation to their school life, might have a relatively minor physical contact with the above victims, such as drinking her arms or drinking her arms with the consent of the victims).

(3) The above actions may be discomfortable from the victims’ standpoint, but the evidence submitted by the prosecutor beyond this can not be readily concluded that the defendant, in an objective manner, causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and commits indecent acts contrary to good sexual morality, with the same act as described in the attached list 2 through 4, 9, and 12.

B) No. 10 of the annexed list of crimes

In an investigative agency and this court, the victim E explained that the Defendant was blick with the Handphone during a free semester program, and made a statement that the Defendant had flicked the victim E’s head (slick) and repeatedly committed the same act even though the victim E had avoided it. However, even according to the victim E’s above statement, it appears that the Defendant’s act was likely that the Defendant’s hand contacted the victim E’s headica or the part above, and even considering the physical condition at the time of physical contact, it is difficult to conclude that the victim E caused the victim’s subjective sexual humiliation or aversion and is objectively contrary to good sexual morality. Rather, it appears that the Defendant’s act was likely to have concentrated in the process of explaining the victim E including the victim, as alleged by the Defendant, and thus, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant’s act was an indecent act as stated in the victim E’s list by virtue of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

B. Summary of the facts charged

A victim B shall be called "K during the class hours consistent in investigation agency and this court." The defendant misleads himself as the above speech and made a tree string, and stated that he was present at the time, and the student who heard school lessons as at the time, and the defendant made a statement at investigation agency that he was prone to the victim B while putting the victim B at the time (one right 43, 444 pages). However, K made a statement at investigation agency that there was no victim B himself, and that the defendant did not have any memory at the time of the victim B (one right 394 pages of investigation record) and that it was difficult for the defendant to have made a statement at the time when the defendant made a statement under the premise that he did not have any other evidence that he had any possibility of physical harm to the victim at the time, and that it was difficult for the defendant to have made a statement at the time when he made a statement under the premise that he made a statement under the premise that he did not have any other evidence that he had any possibility of physical harm to the victim.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime, and thus, a not-guilty verdict is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant does not want to have the public notice of the judgment, so it is so decided as per Disposition by not disclosing the summary of the judgment of

Judges Jeong Jae-hee

Judges Lee Dong-young

Judges Kim Young-soo

1) As of January 18, 2018, N, who was a teacher of the victim H’s fence, made a confirmation of the fact that the Defendant had made an excessive amount of cremation during the counseling and guidance for students in 2017 that an inappropriate physical contact was not observed (Evidence 1 submitted by the Defendant to this court). However, in light of the overall circumstances such as the statement in the victim H’s statement in this court, the victim H appears to have received several cremation guidances from the teacher in 2017 to the female students including the victim H, and N appears to have made cremation guidances to the majority of female students including the victim H, and it is difficult to deem N to have prepared the confirmation document in mind by specifically memorying the case No. 6 in the annexed list of crimes.

2) An open question to ask questions as to whether an indecent act, assault, or assault has been committed against a teacher without premise of the defendant, constitutes an open question, and the question was conducted anonymously.

3) The I did not report the details of damage to the police.

4) Since the sentencing criteria are not applicable as the fine is selected.

5) For example, the victim F stated that the act No. 4 of the annexed Table 1 stated as follows: (a) “the victim F was knife as knife while talking in the front corridor of the health room”; (b) the victim F stated that it was not memory at all as to why the knife was distorted; (c) whether the knife talked with the other knife; and (d) whether the other knife had the same knife (i.e., one right 217 through 219). (ii) the victim H stated that there was an act as listed in the annexed Table 3 and 12, but in any circumstances, the Defendant did not make any concrete statement on the knife of the above act (see, e.g., one right 28 pages of the investigation record;

6) Although there is room to regard the act of taking grandchildren as an indecent act depending on the case, there is room to regard it as an indecent act. However, in daily life, a male teacher per se takes female students with bad faith, and as such, a circumstance should be recognized to regard it as an indecent act.

7) In the case of the act listed in the No. 9 of the List of Crimes in the Annex A, even though according to the statements made by the victim B in this court, in the sense that the Defendant was able to walk up the corridor to enter class, and in the sense that the Defendant was able to take care of the victim B at the time of walking up the corridor, “B is limited to the extent that the above victim’s arms are faced with the victim’s arms at the time of gabing an gab.” Although considering the fact that the victim is a female student at a middle school, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant’s act going against the sexual moral sense, which objectively causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom.

8) Unlike other data submitted by the Defendant, it appears that the content of the report is reliable, on the premise of the specific situation at the time.

9) In this case, the Defendant cannot be held liable for intentional crime, aside from the liability for negligence.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.