(B) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape, etc.) 2013No102

Certain Crime Name: the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

Ban (Indecent Act by Compulsion) and Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

【Violation (Indecent Acts such as Fraudulent Means)】

○ ○

Residential Chungcheongbuk MaMa- group

Both parties

Kim Jong- or (Lawsuits) and Lee Young-young (Trial)

Attorney Park Dong-A

Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Gohap324 Decided July 5, 2013

May 1, 2014

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant

1) The Defendant did not have committed any act identical to the entries in each of the facts charged in the instant case.

B) Even if not, in the case of paragraph (1) of the criminal facts in the judgment, the defendant does not have 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 but her her her her her her her her her her her her but her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her

The sentence of the lower court (a fine of 6 million won, and an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program of 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

(b) Prosecutors;

The sentence of the lower court (a fine of 6 million won, and an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program of 40 hours) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, whether the Defendant committed each of the acts stated in each of the facts charged in the instant case

In light of the records, since it is judged that the statement of the victim corresponding to each of the facts charged in this case is reliable, the court below's decision that recognized the defendant as having committed the same act as the statement of each of the facts charged in this case against the victim is justifiable. The defendant's ground for appeal in this part

2) “Indecent act” refers to an act that causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is objectively contrary to good sexual morality, and thus infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether an act constitutes such act shall be determined with careful consideration of the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the perpetrator and the victim prior to the act, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner of the act, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual morality concept of that time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002). Moreover, it does not require a subjective motive or purpose to stimulate, stimulate, and satisfy the victim’s sexual desire as a constituent element necessary for the establishment of the crime of indecent act by compulsion, regardless of the other party’s intent to commit the act of assault or intimidation, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do6791, Jan. 13, 2006).

B) Examining the above legal principles, even if the Defendant did not have any subjective motive or objective to stimulate, stimulated, and satisfy the victim’s sexual desire at the time of her her son’s her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s 2.

B. We examine both the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

The court below held that the defendant's each of the crimes of this case did not reflect the fact that the defendant contests each of the crimes of this case and did not agree with the victim, and all of the favorable circumstances such as the fact that each of the crimes of this case was committed on the window in the department or in the presence of a meeting atmosphere immediately after the occurrence of the crime, and that the degree of tangible force or indecent act by the victim was not much severe. The victim was a juvenile under the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse at the time of the crime of this case, but it was difficult for the victim to reach 19 years of age at the time of the crime, who was employed as a regular employee at the time of the crime, carried out work equivalent to other adult workers, such as drinking and drinking together with other adult workers. The defendant had no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and there was no other punishment force except for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and all of the favorable circumstances such as the defendant and the prosecutor did not seem to have any undue reasons for the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor.

3. Conclusion

Then, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure

All these are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-soo

Judges Kim Gon-young

Judges Shin Young-jin