2017Gohap1108 Violation of the Juvenile Protection Act

A

Park Labor-Management (prosecution), Gangwon-gu (Public trial)

Attorney B

January 26, 2018

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Criminal facts

From the beginning of July 2016, the Defendant is a person who operates a key bank of a business establishment harmful to juveniles under the trade name of "D" from the underground floor of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

1. The owner of a business establishment harmful to juveniles who has committed a business establishment harmful to juveniles who are prohibited from employing juveniles shall not employ juveniles, and in order to employ employees, he/she shall verify their age;

Nevertheless, the Defendant, on July 1, 2016, employed the “D” bank as an employee, and had the above E engage in physical contact, such as the visitors, kis and kis, breast bucks, and bucks, from September 2016 to September 2016.

2. Violation of prohibition against harmful acts to juveniles;

No person shall, for the purpose of profit-making, have juveniles engage in sexual contact, such as physical contact or exposure to confidential parts, or arrange or instigate such conduct.

Nevertheless, from the beginning of July 2016 to the end of September 2016, the Defendant received KRW 70,000 per hour from the admitted customers and caused E, a juvenile, to engage in physical contact, such as kis, chests, bucks, etc.

A summary of the steam

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement of E;

1. Investigation report (Hearing of statements E);

1. On-site photographs, business registration certificates, identification cards, resident registration certificates, files of “F”-site pictures, pictures showing the characteristics of each screen, pictures, and E pictures;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 58 Subparag. 4 of the Juvenile Protection Act, Article 29(1) of the Juvenile Protection Act (the occupation of a business establishment harmful to juveniles, the choice of imprisonment), Article 55 and Article 30 Subparag. 1 of the Juvenile Protection Act (the occupation of sexual contact with juveniles)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes against the Juvenile Protection Act (within the scope of adding up the long-term punishment of the above two crimes)] Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration favorable circumstances considered in front and rear)

1. The grounds for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year to 13 years;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria: No sentencing criteria shall be set;

3. Determination of sentence: One year of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended sentence are crimes committed by a business establishment harmful to juveniles; although the defendant who operates a business establishment harmful to juveniles does not clearly confirm whether he/she is adult E is a juvenile; he/she is aware of the fact that he/she is a juvenile; he/she is engaged in sexual contact, such as gold physical contact, and gains profits therefrom; and it constitutes a crime using a juvenile who needs social protection, and thus, the crime is highly severe, it is necessary to punish him/her accordingly.

However, the defendant has no record of being punished for the same crime before, the confession of the crime of this case and the fact that the mistake is divided, reflected, etc. shall be considered as favorable circumstances, and the punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the age, character, conduct and family relationship of the defendant and other various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the age, character and behavior, and family relationship

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

The presiding judge, judges, and the Yellow Constitution

Judges Jong-jin

Judges Kim Jae-han