Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year and six months, respectively.

except that from the date of this judgment.

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 11, 2016, the Defendants: (a) 15:30 on July 11, 2016, the victim E (the 52 years old, the 52 years old, the 52 years old, and the 5) was sitting in a “F teahouse” operated by the victim E (the f.). Defendant B was aware of the victim’s body by taking the victim’s hand, and committed an indecent act by taking the victim’s hand into the victim’s panty; and (b) Defendant A committed an indecent act by inserting the victim’s hand on the part above the f.m. part of the f. line.

In the facts charged, Defendant A committed an indecent act such as intending to put the victim’s her her panty with his her her her her her her her her her panty, thereby gathering his her her her panty up to the sound part, and her panty.

기재되어 있으나, 피해자의 수사기관 및 법정 진술에 의하면, 피고인 A이 바지를 벗기려 다가 안 벗겨지자 바지 위로 질 안쪽까지 손가락으로 쑤셨다고

Since there is no disadvantage for the defendants to exercise their right of defense, it is recognized as above without any changes in the indictment because it is favorable to the defendants.

Accordingly, the Defendants committed an indecent act by force on the part of the victims jointly.

2. On July 1, 2016, Defendant A made a public insultd the victim E (hereinafter “victim”) by openly referring to the victim E as “to be deemed to be stast, bast, and so deemed to be too sold, e.g., so as to be too sold,” in the same place as the victim G and H at the same time as that of paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. The witness E’s legal statement (not only is consistent and specific, but also at the time of compulsory indecent act;

There is no inconsistency with other evidence, such as I’s statement, investigation report on the victim’s doctor immediately after the case, and at the time of the insult crime, there was no inconsistency with the other evidence.

G and H’s respective statements are consistent, and in particular, in light of the usual relationship between the Defendants and the injured party, there seems to be any circumstance to make the above statements false, and its credibility is recognized).

1. The legal statement of the witness I (a statement in an investigative agency).