logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.02.13 2014고합603
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(준강제추행)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 13, 2014 or August 14, 2014, 207:30, the Defendant committed an indecent act against a child or juvenile by taking the victim’s drinking in a state of inability to resist by putting him/her out inside the house of the Defendant in Yong-gun, Yong-gun, Yong-gun, or inside the inside of the victim’s D (the age of 16) by gathering his/her fingers, cutting down his/her chests, cutting down his/her fingers into the victim’s panty, and cutting down his/her fingers into the victim’s panty, thereby making it difficult for the Defendant to do so.

Summary of Evidence

Criminal facts in holding

1. Any statement made by the defendant in compliance with this Act;

1. Statement made by the assistant judicial police officer in relation to D's statement that fit for such statement;

1. Among the field photographs of the case, it is possible to recognize them by integrating the images suitable therefor, and there is proof.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 7 (4) and (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and Article 299 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 of the Criminal Act) (Article 62 (1) of the victims who have lived together with the defendant for at least ten days in the house of

1. Review of the reasoning for sentencing of Article 21(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (hereinafter referred to as the “Juvenile Act”), the following facts can be acknowledged.

1. On August 201, 2014, the victims of the instant case came to know of the Defendant’s children, playing in Yong-Namnam-gun and staying in the office of the Defendant, around the first half of that year.

At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant stated that the victim was a person in the inside of the room at the time of the instant crime, and said that the victim was an indecent act in the inside of the room or an indecent act against the victim, and that the victim was "one-time defect" to the victim.

2...

arrow