2018Ma280 Quasi-rape

1. A;

2. B

Kim Sang-hoon (Court of Second Instance), Cho Jong-do (Court of Second Instance)

Law Firm C (For all the defendants)

Attorney D, E

July 11, 2018:

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of each of the above punishment against the Defendants is suspended for three years from the date the judgment became final and conclusive. The Defendants are ordered to attend the sexual assault therapy for 40 hours and provide community service for 40 hours.

Criminal facts

On August 21, 2017, Defendants 1 and 22 years old around the F Station located in Gangnam-gu in Seoul, and 21 years old and 21 years old and , i.e., “T by drinking alcohol together with the victim G (n, 22 years old) and the victim H (n, kn, kn, and kn, and drinking again with “K hotel in Seocho-gu, Seoul.” Defendant A had sexual intercourse with the victim H in 409 of the above hotel and Defendant B had sexual intercourse with the victim under 408 of the above hotel. The Defendants conspired with L after the sex relationship with the victim to change the other party to the sex relationship with the fact that only she or the victims were locked under the influence of alcohol.

1. Crimes against victims G;

On August 22, 2017, at around 06:35, Defendant A exceeded 408, and laid off panty panty of the victim G, which was divingd in a large drinking state, and inserted Defendant A’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s body and the part of the victim’s sound. Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to have sexual intercourse once with the victim who was unable to resist.

2. Crimes against victims H;

Defendant B entered the above hotel No. 409 on August 22, 2017, around 06:35, and 06:35, Defendant B laid down the body of the victim H who was divingd in the state of panty and brode, and inserted the Defendant’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sexual flag, and inserted the Defendant’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sexual organ. Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to have sexual intercourse once with the victim who was unable to resist.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement of G and H;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the letter of request for appraisal (2017-H-17293 and 17296) and the letter of request for appraisal (2017-M-2629);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Defendants: Articles 299, 297, and 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendants: former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the crime of quasi-rape against Victims G with heavy circumstances)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendants: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (Ch. 1 of the Criminal Act). 1. Suspension of execution

Defendants: each of the Defendants: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code (The following consideration is made for the reasons for sentencing)

1. Order to attend lectures or order to provide community service;

Defendants: the main sentence of Article 16(2) and (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

1. Exemption from orders for disclosure and notification;

Defendants: Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; the proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the fact that there is no history of punishment for a sexual crime against the Defendants; in this case, the principal sentence and incidental disposition alone appears to have the effect of preventing the Defendants from repeating the crimes; and in full view of the Defendants’ age, family environment, social relationship, occupation, and the details and result of the instant crime; the disclosure and notification order; the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendants’ disadvantage caused by the disclosure and notification order; the prevention effect of sexual crimes that may be achieved; and the effect of protecting the victims of sexual crimes, the Defendants are obligated to submit personal information pursuant to Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

1. The grounds for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and June 1 to June 22;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Basic crimes and concurrent crimes: Each quasi-rape;

[Determination of Punishment] General Criteria for Sex Offenses, Type 1 (General Rape) (Special Rape) (Special Rapes : Non-incompetent of Punishment)

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months to 3 years (Discretionary Zone)

B. The scope of final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple offenses;

From June to April of one year and six months of imprisonment (=the upper limit of the basic crime + the upper limit of the first concurrent crime)

3. The crime of this case by which the defendants conspired to commit the crime of this case and thus, it is not good that the defendants had sexual intercourse with each other with the victims who are under the influence of alcohol in the state of incompetence.

However, the Defendants are primary offenders, and they are against the mistake by recognizing the instant crime, and they do not commit again at the counseling center for victims of sexual assault, such as receiving counseling and education to prevent recidivism. The victims agree with the Defendants, and expressed their intent that they would not want punishment. This is favorable to the Defendants. In addition, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc. are considered as a whole, and the sentence is determined as per the disposition.

The presiding judge, the Gimology judge

Judges Kim Gin-young

Judges, Senior Jins