logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.05.09 2018고단7977
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(성적목적다중이용장소침입)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On June 20, 2018, around 11:55, the Defendant entered the Incheon subway Line 2 located in Michuhol-gu Incheon in Michuhol-gu, Incheon, to protect women's appearance, and entered women's toilets.

Accordingly, the defendant invadeds on female toilets to satisfy his sexual desire.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the legal statement of witness D (excluding the part of the professional statement made by the untitled woman);

1. Protocol of partial police statements of E (nameless women are excluded from the part of the re-professional statement);

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and defense counsel on field photographs, 112 report processing lists, internal investigation reports (the Eline Investigation by the Arrester of Flagrant Offender), CCTV images to the extent that the Defendant and the defense counsel are.

1. The gist of the allegation is that the Defendant was wrong with the wind, which was coming into the toilet rapidly, and that he did not intrude into female toilets for sexual purposes.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment records, i.e., that the Defendant was not found in the female toilets with which he was employed, and that the Defendant appears to have been more than 10 minutes in the female toilets despite the request of the service personnel, etc., and the social work personnel E made a statement that he did not hear any sound which the Defendant heard during that period; and ③ the Defendant was in the structure of the C Station, and there seems to be less likely to have entered the toilets without distinguishing the toilets from the toilets, and even if having entered the waterway, it was immediately known that he was female toilets. In light of the above, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s above assertion is rejected.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 12 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Selection of Imprisonment with labor;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes committed against Order to attend lectures;

1. An order to restrict employment;

arrow