2013Gohap430, 431 (Joint), 432 (Joint), 433 (Joint), 2014Gohap73 (Joint)

(a) Violation of the Narcotics Control Act;

(b) A violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape, etc.);

The violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape)

(c) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. (a) A;

2. (a) B

3. (a)(b)(c) C

4. (a)(b) D

A tent, a garment, or a madmony (public trial)

Attorney E (the defendant A, the defendant D)

Attorney F (Korean National Assembly for the defendant B)

Attorney G, H (for the defendant C)

June 24, 2014

1. Defendant A, B, and C shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for 10 years and by imprisonment with prison labor for 7 years.

2. 7,100,00 won from Defendant A, 7,840,00 won from Defendant B, 3,740,000 won from Defendant C, and 400,000 won from Defendant D shall be collected respectively.

3. To order the Defendants to pay an amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge.

4. To order the Defendants to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 80 hours each time.

5. Each disclosure information about the Defendants shall be made public through the information and communications network for a period of ten years (Provided, That the summary of a sex offense shall be limited to the crimes listed in paragraphs 1, 2, 4 through 8, 9, 11 through 13, 15, 16, and 18 of the judgment with respect to Defendant A, Articles 19, 21 through 23, 26, 27 of the judgment with respect to Defendant C, and Articles 28 and 30 of the judgment with respect to Defendant C).

6. Each notice information about the Defendants shall be notified to the Defendants for a period of 10 years (Provided, That the summary of a sex offense shall be limited to each of the crimes described in paragraphs 1, 2, 4, and 8 of the judgment against Defendant A, Articles 9, 11 through 13, 15, 16, and 18 of the judgment against Defendant B, Articles 19, 21 through 23, 26, and 27 of the judgment against Defendant C, and Articles 28 and 30 of the judgment against Defendant D of the judgment against Defendant C).

Criminal facts

[2013Gohap430]

Although Defendant A is not a person handling narcotics, he dealt with the Mebacopty (one-name 'copon'; hereinafter referred to as ‘copon'), and raped the victim I, 16 years of age, and hereinafter referred to as the "victim") who was known through the Mebing as follows.

1. Use and medication of philophones, child or juvenile rape;

On June 20, 2013, between 18:00 to 20:00, Defendant A used a penphone over two occasions by injecting approximately 0.05g of oponon on one-time part of the victim’s arms with the victim’s own arms at around 311, Defendant A used a penphone over two occasions by injecting the victim’s own arms with approximately 0.05g of opon on one-time part of the victim’s arms, and administered two times by injecting approximately 0.05g of opon on one-time part of the part of the victim’s body. Defendant A was raped with the victim by committing rape, and Defendant A committed rape with the part of the victim.

2. Use and medication of philophones, and rape of children and juveniles;

On June 20, 2013, from around 22:00 to 12:00 on June 22, 2013, Defendant A administered 0.05g of philophones containing water in the places described in paragraph (1), from 0.05g of philophones containing a single-use injection into water to other victims, and used the remaining philophones twice by means of injecting them into the victim’s arms bloodline. Defendant A administered approximately 0.05g of philophones containing a single-use injection in one-use injection method by means of injecting them into the victim’s arms, and had the victim resist against resistance by administering philophones, as above, and raped the victim by sexual intercourse.

3. Use of Handphones;

On June 25, 2013, from around 14:00 to 19:00, Defendant A used philopon by inserting approximately 0.05g of philopon, which Defendant A entered in a single-use injection machine, with the victim’s arms from around 14:0 to around 19:01, Defendant A used philopon by inserting approximately 0.05g of philopon on the part of the victim’s arms.

4. Use and medication of philophones, and rape of children and juveniles;

Defendant A: (a) around June 25, 2013, from around 20:00 to around 30.0 of the same month, at the place described in paragraph (3); (b) around 0.05g philophones dilution with water for a disposable injection machine; and (c) at the same time, Defendant A had the victim drinkd with drinking water; (d) Defendant A used the philophones remaining after being used by Defendant A as above by injecting the victim’s arms to the victim’s arms, on five occasions; and (e) administered approximately 0.05g philophones, which are contained in the single-use injection machine, five times in a way of injecting the victim’s arms, and prevented the victim from resisting the philophones, and then Defendant A raped the victim by committing sexual intercourse.

5. Use of phiphonephones. Medications, children - Juvenile Rape.

Defendant A, from around 14:00 on the first day of July 2013, to around 2, 100, 102, 'Maurel' located in N in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for about 102 days, and Defendant A and Defendant A had sexual intercourse with the victim by using 0.05g of philophones contained in the victim's for a single-use injection in the victim's arms at least four times, using 0.05g of philophones contained in the single-use injection in the victim's arms. Defendant A and B were able to administer 0.05g of philophones contained in the single-use injection in the victim's arms, and failed to resist the victim by force, and then Defendant A and B had sexual intercourse with the victim.

6. Use and medication of philophones, and rape of children and juveniles;

Defendant A, from around 18:00 to around 19:00 on the first day of July 2013, with B, for about 15 days from approximately 15 days, he used a penphone for 15 times by injecting 0.05g of philopon on the part of the victim’s arms while Defendant A was able to injecting 0.05g of philopon on the part of the victim’s arms, and injected 0.05m of philopon on the part of the single-use injection machine into his arms bloodline. Defendant A and the victim were raped by committing sexual intercourse with the victim, respectively. Defendant A and the victim: (a) took 15 times more than 15 mopon on the part of the victim’s arms; and (b) took 0.05m of philopon on the part of the first injection machine.

7. Use of philophones, and rape of children or juveniles;

Defendant A, at around 02:00 on July 2013, at the end of 02:0, ' Qel' as indicated in paragraph (6), 606, and 0.05g philophones, which are mixed with water, sent back to other victims of drinking water, and used philophones by means of injecting the remaining philophones into the body of the victim's arms, and prevented the victim from resisting against the victim by administering the philophones as above, and sexual intercourse with the victim.

8. Use and medication of philophones, and rape of children and juveniles;

Defendant A, along with B, for about seven days from the beginning of August 2013, 301, Quateel as described in paragraph (6) 301, 306, 307, and 308, etc., Defendant A used 0.05g of philopon, which Defendant A used for the victim’s arms at least once, using 7 times as a method of injecting the victim’s arms into the victim’s blood line, and administering approximately 0.05g of philopon, which was entered into a single-use injection, on seven occasions, by injecting the victim’s arms, and preventing the victim from resisting by administering the philopon, as above, and committing rape with Defendant A and B, respectively.

[2013Gohap431]

Although Defendant B is not a person handling narcotics, he dealt with philophones as follows, and raped the victim who was a juvenile who was fluent by hosting.

9. Use and medication of philophones, and rape of children and juveniles;

At around 15:00 on June 20, 2013, Defendant B added approximately 0.05g of the philopon in the Songpa-gu Seoul Songpa-gu J to 311, Defendant B used the philopon by means of drinking the philopon as if the philopon did not contain a philopon to the victim, and administered 0.05g of the philopon contained in the 1st injection for the purpose of using the philopon in his arms. The victim was off all other clothes that the victim lost the mind due to the philopon, and the victim did not have a sexual relation with the Dolopon, so that the victim would have salopon injection without the victim's 's hicker' or her sexual intercourse with the victim, thereby having sexual intercourse with the victim.

10. Use of Handphones;

Defendant B used 0.05g philophones on June 20, 2013 at around 15:20, at the places described in paragraph (9) at around 15:20, using philophones by forcing the victim to take 0.05g philophones on the right side of the victim.

11. Use of philophones - medication, child or juvenile rape.

Defendant B along with A at the place described in paragraph (9) between 18:00 and 20:00 on June 20, 2013, and Defendant B used 0.05g of philophones containing both arms of the victim in a single-use injection method for the victim’s arms, and administered 0.05g of philophones containing a single-use injection device over two occasions by means of injecting the victim’s arms into the victim’s arms, and administered 0.05g of philophones containing a single-use injection device over two occasions. Defendant B was unable to resist by dividing the shoulder of the victim’s shoulder, raped the victim by sexual intercourse, and Defendant B, by changing its role, raped the victim.

12. Use and medication of philophones, and child and juvenile rape;

Defendant B, from around 22:00 on June 6, 2013 to 12:00 on the same month, used 0.05g of philophones in the places described in paragraph (9), and used 0.05g of philophones in the single-use injection to the blood line of the victim’s arms, and administered 0.05g of philophones in the single-use injection machine to the blood line of the victim’s own arms. As seen above, Defendant B, from around 22:00 to around 22:00 on the same month, had sexual intercourse with the victim and raped the victim.

13. Use of philophones, child or juvenile rape;

On June 25, 2013, from around 14:00 to 19:00, Defendant B added both arms of the victim, and used 0.05g of oponon, which Defendant B used in the method of compulsory injection into the victim’s arms in the victim’s arms, between Defendant B and the victim from around 14:00, and Defendant B had sexual intercourse with the victim after he prevented the victim from resisting the victim by administering a opon.

14. Handphones - Medication.

On June 25, 2013, from around 20:0 to around 30, 200 of the same month, Defendant B, along with A at the place described in paragraph (13), had Defendant B drinked approximately 0.05g philoon, which is dilution with water with the disposable injection machine, to other victims of drinking water. Defendant B used five times in a way that Defendant B took both arms of the victim and injected the remaining philoon into the part of the victim’s arms, and 0.05g philoon, which is remaining after being used as above, into the part of the victim’s arms.

15. Use of philophones - medication, child or juvenile rape.

Defendant B, from around 14:00 on the first day of July 2013, to around 2, 100, 100, with A, used a penphone for four times by injecting approximately 0.05g of a penphone, which Defendant B entered into the victim’s forth use, into the victim’s forth use, and administered four times the 0.05g of a penphone, which is entered into the part of the victim’s forth use, into the victim’s forth time, by injecting the victim’s forth time, and by injecting the 0.05g of a penphone, which is entered into the part of the victim’s forth time in his own arms. After preventing the victim from resisting the phone, Defendant B and A sexual intercourse with the victim, respectively.

16. Use of philophones - medication, child or juvenile rape.

Defendant B, from around 18:00 to around 19:00 on the first day of July 2013, to around 15, 2013, with A, for about 608 of the " Qmoto P" in Seoul, the victim's own arms, and Defendant B, with water-dilution 0.05g of the penphone, used 0.05g on 15 occasions by injecting the victim's own arms to the victim's arms, and injected 0.05g of the penphone, which is contained in the single-use injection machine, into the victim's arms, for about 15 times. As above, Defendant B and A committed rape, respectively.

17. Handphones;

Defendant B received 15:00 on the last day of July 2013, 2013, 15:00 on the first day of the exit of S Station No. 1 in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, one-time injection equipment containing approximately 0.8g of philopon from the person (T) in front of the exit of S Station No. 1 in Gangnam-gu.

18. Use of philophones - Medication, child or juvenile rape.

Defendant B, along with A, for about seven days from the beginning of August 2013, 301, Qbel as described in paragraph (16) “ Qbel” 301, 306, 307, and 308 rooms, etc., Defendant B used a penphone for seven times by injecting approximately 0.05g of a penphone, which Defendant B draped with water into the victim’s for a single-use injection machine, into the victim’s arms, and administered seven times in a way of injecting 0.05g of a penphone, which is contained in a single-use injection machine, into his own arms, and prevented the victim from resisting by administering a penphone, and then Defendant B and A raped the victim by sexual intercourse, respectively.

[2013Gohap432]

Although Defendant C is not a person handling narcotics, he handled philophones as follows, handled similar acts to the victim who is a juvenile in b hosting, and raped the victim.

19. Use of philophones - medication, and the act of similarity between children and juveniles;

Defendant C administered approximately 0.05 g of philophones on July 2013, between 18:00 to 19:00 on the date, and around 18:00, Defendant C added the volume of philophones in Seoulan P, which Defendant C possessed to drinked with drinking water. Defendant C added the volume of philophones on the part of the victim into water, and then injected them into the part of the victim’s cell line. Defendant C administered approximately 0.05 g of philophones on the part of the single-use injection into the part of the Defendant C’s arms blood line. As seen above, Defendant C took the part of the victim’s clothes by forcing the victim to take the part of the victim’s chest and the part of the victim, and carried out a similarity movement by inserting them into the part of the victim’s hand.

20. Acceptance of Handphones;

Defendant C received approximately 0.8g of 15:00 p.m. on July 2013, 2013, from S Station No. 1 in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government R, one-time c.m., one-time c.m., one-time c., one-time c.m., one-time c., one-time c., one-time c.m.

21. Use of phiphonephones - medication, and similarity of children or juveniles;

Defendant C administered 0.05g of philopon on July 2013 to Defendant C’s arms in Gangnam-gu Seoul for three (3) days from the end of July 2013 to the end of 3 days, dilutioning the volume of philopon in drinking water held by Defendant C with drinking water. Defendant C performed similar acts over three times by inserting it into the part of the victim’s blopon and inserting it into the part of the victim’s blopon. Defendant C administered approximately 0.05g of philopon on the part of the part of the victim’s blopon into the part of the Defendant C’s arms. As above, Defendant C administered copon six (6) times by inserting it into the part of the victim’s body, and then putting his handlop into the part of the victim’s blopon into the part of the victim’s body.

22. Use of philophones - medication, children and juveniles

On August 2013, Defendant C administered approximately 0.05 gramphones contained in Defendant C’s arms in Gangnam-gu Seoul at around 17:00 on the first day of August 2013, 2013 by dilutioning the volume of philophones in drinking water, and then melting the volume of philophones contained in Defendant C into drinking water. Defendant C performed the act of similarity by inserting approximately 0.05 gram of philophones contained in the single-use injection machine into Defendant C’s arms bloodline, and by inserting them back to the victim’s clothes, the victim was forced to administered the phiphones, and then putting them back to the part of the victim’s fingers.

23. Use of philophones - Medication, child or juvenile rape.

Defendant C, at around 19:00 as of the date indicated in paragraph 22, with D at the place described in paragraph 22 at around 19:00, the following: (a) Defendant C, with the victim “I will die without sexual intercourse with D; and (b) prevented the victim from sustaining and resisting his shoulder; (c) Defendant C used 0.05g of philophones contained in the disposable injection for the victim’s arms to injecting the victim’s arms; and (d) administered approximately 0.05g of philophones contained in the disposable injection for the first time by means of injecting the victim’s arms to the Defendant C’s arms; and (e) Defendant C, with the victim’s forced administration of phiphones, prevented the victim from resisting; and (e) Defendant C, with the victim’s shouldering each side of the victim; and (e) raped the victim by sexual intercourse.

24. Use and medication of philophones;

Defendant C, at 16:00 on the day following the date indicated in paragraph 22, 1102 of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Ytel’s “Ytel” 16:00, the Defendant added the volume of the penphones in drinking water carried by Defendant C to drinking water, and then dilulon was used by dilutioning the volume of the penphones in a single-use injection instrument into water with the victim’s outer blood transfusion, and administered approximately 0.05 g of the penphones contained in the single-use injection instrument to Defendant C’s arms in a method of injection.

25. Receipt of Handphones;

Defendant C received from the first police officer to the second police officer on August 2013, 2013 the 'AAMoel' in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 2 from the guest room in the front 'AMoel' in Gangdong-gu, Seoul, and from the person who was killed in the name (T), the philophone was dried and received.

26.Use and medication of Handphones, child or juvenile sexual intercourses

Defendant C, at around 01:00 on August 2013, 201, administered 0.05 gramphones contained in the single-use injection in Defendant C’s arms in a way of melting the victim’s clothes, and then melting the victim’s rophone’s non-phones contained in the single-use injection into water, and melting 0.05 grams contained in the single-use injection into Defendant C’s arms blood cells. As seen above, Defendant C administered 0.05 grams contained in the single-use injection into the victim’s arms, and forced the victim to take the rophones, and then, the victim exceeded the victim’s clothes and went back to the victim’s movement by inserting his fingers into the part of the victim.

27. Use of philophones - medication, and similarity of children and juveniles;

On September 1, 2013, at around 05:00, Defendant C used 0.05 gramphones for the victim’s arms in the 'AC telecom’ room located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, in a way of injecting 0.05 gramphones on the part of the victim’s arms, and administered approximately 0.05 gramphones on the part of the single-use injection machine to Defendant C’s arms in a way of injecting 0.05 grams on the part of the victim’s arms. As above, Defendant C performed the act of similarity in such a way as to take the rophones into the part of the victim’s arms after he administered the rophones into the part of the victim’s body, and put his fingers out of the victim’s clothes into the part of the victim’s body.

[2013Gohap43]

Criminal Power

Defendant D was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on December 17, 2013 at the Seoul Central District Court on December 24, 2013 for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (fence).

Criminal facts

Although Defendant D is not a person handling narcotics, he dealt with philophones as follows, and raped the victim who was a juvenile who was b having been engaged in crying.

28. Mephone medication, child or juvenile rape;

Defendant D, at around 19:00 on the first day of August 2013, 201, administered 0.05 glopon to Defendant D’s arms in Gangnam-gu Seoul, “X2” as well as C, “C would kill the victim without having sexual intercourse with D,” and prevented C from putting the victim’s shoulder, and at the same time, C used approximately 0.05 g of lopon on the part of the victim’s arms in a disposable injection, and Defendant D administered approximately 0.05 g of lopon on the part of the victim’s arms in a single-use injection. As above, Defendant D spopon administered 0.05g of lopon into the part of Defendant D’s arms in a single-use injection method so as to prevent the victim from putting the victim at resistance, thereby having sexual intercourse with each of the victims, and made the victim devising and committing sexual intercourse.

29. Medication of phiphones;

Defendant D administered approximately 0.05g of philophones contained in Gangnam-gu Seoul Ytel at around 16:00 on August 2013, 2013, in a way of injection into Defendant D’s arms and blood cells, around 1102 and 0.05g of philophones contained in a disposable injection machine.

30. Use of philophones - Medication, child or juvenile rape.

Defendant D, at around 08:00 on the lower half of August 2013, 2013, 'AEcomcom' 207 in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, 'AEcom 207', and 'AEcom 207', 'propon' in a drinking water, and 'propon' in a single-use injection device', 'propon con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con con c

[2014Gohap73]

Although Defendant C is not a person handling narcotics, Defendant C dealt with philophones as follows.

31. Handphones - Medication.

On February 2, 2012, at least 22:00, Defendant C added AH to the “AG Hospital near AF” at the beginning of the early 22:0, and then purchased a phiphone from AI, and then returned to Seoul by burning AH again, Defendant C tried to see whether AH would administer a phiphone at the same time. At around 23:00 on the same day, Defendant C entered the “AL telephone near the exit No. 7 of the AK Station in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and received approximately 0.05 g of a phiphone from AH with a philopon, added AH into a single-use injection machine, added AH into a dilution, and then administered the dive phone by selling it to Defendant C.

32. Receipt and administration of Handphones;

At around 16:00 on the first day of April 2012, Defendant C received approximately 0.03 gramopon from AO from “N Shoco” located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, for free, and received oponon from AO.C. At around 2012, April 19, 19:00, Defendant C administered 0.03 gramopon in the manner of copon in the dwelling of Defendant C located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

[2013Gohap430]

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Each legal statement of witness I and Q respectively;

1. Each protocol of suspect examination of Defendant A prepared by the public prosecutor, which contains some statements;

1. The written statement of Q Q prepared by the prosecutor;

1. As to a request for appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific and Investigative Research (the result of the reaction to narcotics by the victim I, and the result of the reaction to narcotics by the defendant C);

1. Investigation report (a copy of the investigative report, a copy of each written statement of the victim I, a victim's I written statement, a photograph of side effects, a cover-to-face, a cover-to-face identification card, a telephone-to-face photograph, a telephone-to-face photographing, a photo of the criminal scene, a video-to-face conversation hearing report of the defendant A and the defendant D, a copy of the indictment by the defendant B, a copy of the Seoul Central District Court's 2013Kadan580, a trial card, a report on the calculation of a surcharge, a report on the calculation of a surcharge,

[2013Gohap431]

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. Partial statement of the witness A Q in the court;

1. Some statements in the suspect examination protocol as to Defendant B prepared by the public prosecutor;

1. Each written statement of prosecutor’s preparation;

1. Report by the National Institute of Scientific and Investigative Research on Request for Expert Opinion (the result of the test of drug reaction against the victim, and the result of the test of drug reaction against the defendant C’s hair);

1. Investigation report (a copy of each protocol of examination of the suspect with respect to Defendant A and C, a copy of victim's side effects, a written identification, a written identification, a telephone name at the scene of the crime, a copy of the indictment by Defendant B, and a copy of the judgment, etc.);

[2013Gohap432]

1. Defendant C’s partial statement

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. Partial statement of the witness A Q in the court;

1. Each protocol of examination of the suspect as to Defendant C prepared by the public prosecutor, which contains some statements;

1. Statement of statement made by the public prosecutor;

1. A copy of the report requested by the National Institute of Scientific and Investigative Research for Appraisal (the result of the test of drug reaction against the victim, and the result of the test of drug reaction against Defendant C’s hair);

1. Investigation report (a copy of each written statement of statement of the public prosecutor prepared, photograph of the defendant C, victim's photophone side effects, identification card, name of telephones at the scene of crime, name of telephones at the scene of crime, copy of the indictment by the defendant B, each protocol of suspect examination of the defendant A, D, and R, and each statement of calculation of additional collection charges, etc.);

[2013Gohap43]

1. The defendant D's partial statement

1. Legal statement of a witness;

1. Partial statement of the witness A Q in the court;

1. Each protocol of examination of suspect as to Defendant D prepared by the public prosecutor, which contains some statements;

1. Statement of prosecutor’s preparation;

1. Report by the National Institute of Scientific and Investigative Research on Request for Expert Opinion (the result of the test of drug reaction against the victim, and the result of the test of drug reaction against the defendant C’s hair);

1. Investigation report (a copy of each written statement of investigative arrival and information report, each victim I written statement of statement, victim I's side effects, photographic effects, Defendant D's photograph, copy of separate written judgment and protocol of suspect examination, written statement of suspect interrogation, written statement of suspect interrogation, written statement of suspect interrogation, written statement of suspect interrogation, written statement of defendant B's case at the scene of crime, copy of each case of the defendant B, specific date of crime, hearing of the interview between the defendant D and the defendant A, each protocol of suspect interrogation of the defendant A, C, and R, Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013 Godan580, and written statement of calculation of additional charges, etc.);

Criminal records of the judgment

1. Criminal records;

1. Investigation report (a separate decision, a copy of trial card No. 2013 High Court Decision, Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013 High Court Decision 5580, etc.);

[2014Gohap73]

1. Defendant C’s legal statement (the fifth trial date);

1. AH of police preparation and a copy of each protocol of suspect examination of AI;

1. A request for appraisal by the National Scientific Investigation Institute;

1. Investigation report (each judgment of the Director General, AO and AI, calculation of additional collection charges, etc.);

Application of Statutes

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

(a) Defendant A: Articles 60(1)2, 4(1), and 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the use and medication of a penphone and the choice of imprisonment) / Each subparagraph of Article 7(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the occupation of rape and the selection of a limited term)

(b) Defendant B: Each of Articles 60(1)2, 4(1), and 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the receipt of a medication using a scoponphone and the choice of imprisonment) / Article 7(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the occupation of rape and the selection of a limited term)

(c) Defendant C: Articles 60(1)2, 4(1), and 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the use, medication, and receipt of a penphone, the choice of imprisonment) / Each of the subparagraphs of Article 7(2)2 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the occupation of similar act) / Article 7(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the occupation of rape and the choice of limited imprisonment)

(d) Defendant D: Articles 60(1)2, 4(1), and 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the use of a penphone and the selection of imprisonment) / Article 7(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (the occupation of rape and the selection of a limited term)

2. Handling concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant D: the latter part of Article 37 and the main sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act;

3. Aggravation of concurrent crimes; and

(a) Defendant A: The first sentence of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act, and the first sentence of Article 50 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape)

(b) Defendant B: The first sentence of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, and the last sentence on August 2013, 2013, when a person commits concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated in the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape)

(c) Defendant C: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (limited to concurrent crimes with the punishment provided for in the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which is the largest punishment);

(d) Defendant D: The penalty provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, and the severe penalty on August 19, 2013, among the concurrent crimes committed in violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, around 19:00;

4. Additional collection:

(a) Defendant A: proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act [the basis for calculation: 7.1 million won = (the frequency of use of a phiphonephones 37 times + the frequency of use of a phiphones 34 times + the average amount of 10,000 won for each X phiphones 34 times)];

(b) Defendant B: proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act [the basis for calculation: 7840,000 won = (37 times of use of opphones + the number of 35 times of opphones administered + KRW 100,000 won on the average amount of opphones per 1g of X opphones + the average amount of 0.8g X opphones per 80,000 won per opphones];

(c) Defendant C: proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act [the base for calculation: 3740,00 won = [(the frequency of using opphones + 13 times each time each opphone is used + 15 times each 13 times each time each opphone is administered (the average value of 100,000 won per opphones each time each 73 times each 2014 high-class 73 times each 2 times)]; + [the number ofopphones each x 0.8g each opphone + the average value of 80,000 won per opphones each gram + three times each opphone number (the 1st 2013 high-class 432 case), 2014 high-class 73rd case)];

(d) Defendant D: proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act [the basis for calculation: 400,000 won = (one time of use of phiphonephones + the number of times of use of phiphones + 3 times of the number of phiphones administered) 100,000 won on the average value of mephones per time];

4. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

5. Order to complete programs;

Article 21 (2) and (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

6. An order for disclosure and notification;

Article 49 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse / Article 50 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

[However, the summary of a sex offense is limited to the crimes listed in Section 1, 2, 4, and 8 of the Decision against Defendant A, Section 9, Section 11 through 13, 15, 16, and 18 of the Decision against Defendant B, Section 19, 21 through 23, 26, and 27 of the Decision against Defendant C, and Section 28 and 30 of the Decision against Defendant D]

Judgment on Defendants’ assertion

1. Summary of the Defendants’ assertion and the issues of the instant case

A. Summary of the Defendants’ assertion 2)

In common, the Defendants asserts that the victim's statement is hard to recognize credibility in light of the fact that the victim received the victim's own shares of AS and received money in return for the false statement, that the victim directly made the life card of Defendant D, that the victim directly made the life card of Defendant D, that the victim's statement fell in entertainment and that the contents of the victim's statement fall in an emergency. On the other hand, the Defendants asserts that the victim's statement is not guilty, acquitted, and dismissed.

B. Key issue of the instant case

With respect to the instant case, there exists a victim’s statement (a witness’s statement to the effect that the Defendants were forced to take a philophone medication and rape, which correspond directly to each of the facts charged against the Defendants, and that the Defendants were forced to take a philophone medication or rape. However, as seen earlier, the Defendants argued that the credibility of the victim’s statement cannot be recognized in common, and on the other hand, the Defendants asserted the grounds for separate innocence, acquittal, dismissal of prosecution, and dismissal of prosecution. Accordingly, the lower court should first determine the credibility of the victim’s statement, and then determine the Defendants’ individual assertion on the premise thereof.

2. Determination of credibility of the victim's statement

A. Relevant legal principles

In a case where a witness’s statement, including a victim, is generally consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless there exist any separate and reliable evidence to deem the credibility of the statement objectively deemed objectively and objectively (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do362, Apr. 15, 2005). In a case where the witness’s statement is consistent in the main part of the statement, the mere fact that the witness’s statement is somewhat inconsistent with the statement concerning other minor matters is not to be rejected without permission (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008).

(b) basic facts;

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the following facts are recognized:

1) The growth process and family environment of the victim

A) Around December 1996, the victim was born in the Republic of Korea and completed the fourth-year course of an elementary school while residing in the United States as his father was going to study in the United States on August 1997. Since then, the victim returned to Korea on January 2007 and graduated from an elementary school and a middle school. Since November 201, 2012, the victim returned to Korea with her mother and returned to Korea on February 2013.

B) The victim was committed the instant crime between June 2013 and August 2013, 2013, and was going to China around October 2013, but returned to China only one week due to per capita infection. Around January 2014, the victim was going to New Zealand to a high school.

C) The victim’s family members are only parents and the victims who are married with the victim. The father acquired the degree of engineering doctor’s degree in the United States and served as the head of the domestic research institute team of the large enterprise in Korea.

D) The victim was unaware of the Defendants before committing the instant crime.

2) Details of the occurrence of the instant crime

A) On June 2013, when the victim was in a place of friendship-gu office, the victim came to talk with the Defendant B in the “AT,” which is an Internet hosting site. The victim was unfolded that he was in a place of friendship-gu office, and the victim said that Defendant B was a 'Kel', which is located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J, and became 311.

B) Defendant B prevented the victim from communicating with the outside by cutting off the cell phone, wallets, etc. of the victim’s cell phone and wallets. Since then, the crime of this case was committed in the order of approximate Defendant B, A, C, and D against the victim.

3) The victim's behavior attitude at the time of the crime of this case

A) At the time of the instant crime, the victim was able to use the mobile phone at one’s own time. However, the Defendants allowed the Defendants to use the mobile phone at one’s own expense by blocking the network function of the mobile phone so as to prevent contact with the outside. The period of the crime seems to have been relatively freely used by the victim.

B) In addition, at the time of the crime of this case, the victim was able to play off his house. However, this was threatened by the defendants that the defendants would not be able to go off to her house, and the victim had to go back immediately after being her clothes from home, or re-exploited into the telecom that the defendants are irs. It seems that the victim could have been able to freely come up with the period of crime.

C) The victim had her father’s her associate card. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendants used the her body card in mind.

4) The details of the victim’s statement concerning the instant crime

A) The victim was committed the instant crime from the Defendants, and became aware of the AS AS Q, known to the ordinary Defendants. AS and Q heard talking about the instant crime from the victim (a) and informed the Defendants to the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office around November 25, 2013.

B) After the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office, the Defendants were investigated, and the victims were present at the prosecutor's office to return to the prosecutor's office and stated on the instant crime as the victim of the crime.

C. Determination of credibility of the victim's statement

1) It is true that the victim has some parts that are somewhat consistent or accurately unsatisfy about the date and time of the instant crime, the specific time and time, the frequency of scopon medication and rape, etc.

2) However, considering the following facts and circumstances revealed in the records and arguments of this case, the victim’s statement directly consistent with each of the facts charged against the Defendants is deemed to have credibility to the extent that it excludes a reasonable doubt.

A) Compatibility and specification of the victim’s statements

(1) The crime of this case is committed by several defendants, who are under the age of 16, for a short period of 2,30 months, and is administered several or intensive phiphones from several defendants, and is also committed rape. As such, the crime of this case is committed against adults who can exercise the right to sexual self-determination, and there is no legal system that applies to crimes committed against adults, or rape crimes committed by a single sex.

(2) On such premise, it seems practically impossible for the victim to accurately memory the specific time and frequency of the crime. In particular, considering that most victims were forced to administer phiphonephones at the time of the crime and did not have a mental or physical exhaustion, and ③ the victims were subjected to repeated crimes in a similar environment where multiple urphones are transferred to the victim, it can be said that there is a part that is somewhat consistent or accurately inconsistent with the date and time of the crime in this case, the specific time and time, the frequency of the use of phiphones, and the frequency of rapes, etc., and that there is a part that could be partially confused with the order and frequency of the crime in this case.

(3) Nevertheless, the victim made a statement in a relatively consistent manner in line with the movement route of the telephones during the investigation process to this court in order. ② The victim visited the her motherel, who was the victim to commit the crime, with investigators, and made a statement by leaving his memory about the scene of the crime. ③ The Defendants’ philophone medication method (e.g., cutting the philophone into the philophone, making the philophone scopscopscopscop back to the victim’s arms, and following rape and similar rape (e.g., taking the remaining philophonescopscops into the victim’s arms) and the method of committing the crime of rape and similar rape (e.g., rape and rape during the long time). The victim’s first statement about the crime of this case, including the victim’s cellphone medication, is consistent with each other’s statement on the victim’s act (i.e., the victim’s act of rape).

(4) In addition, even though the victim seems to have never experienced in the administration of oponon, because he did not know that he was a female student at his age, he did not have the experience in the administration of oponon. However, if the method of administering oponon (including making the opon on the opons or the opons, dilution the remaining oponon into the water, and doning the opon into the body) had the oponononon when he administered the opononon, he did not make any statement in detail, such as the opon, the opon, the opon, the opon, the opon, the opon, and the opon, the opon, the opon’s body, the opon, the opon’s body, and the opon on the opon.

(5) In particular, the victim, while studying in New Zealand at present, entered the Republic of Korea for testimony in this Court. The victim’s attitude of the victim’s statement observed in the process of testimony was not satisfyed or exaggerated, and the victim’s satisfyed and satisfyed. When it is difficult to explain it, the victim’s satisfy did not appear to have an attitude to make a false statement by satisfying the crimes.

B) Supporting credibility based on relevant evidence

The victim’s statements that correspond to each of the facts charged in the instant case are supported by the credibility of the statements from various facts or circumstances acknowledged by relevant evidence as follows.

(1) The employee of Qel, one of the places where the instant crime was committed, stated that the Defendant A and B met with the victim for about twenty (20) days from July 2013 to August 2013, when the instant crime was committed.

(2) In light of the result of the narcotics reaction test on the victim’s hair (the taking of November 25, 2013) by the National Science Investigation Agency, and the reaction from the victim’s hair to the victim’s hair to the 2cc through 4cc. In general, it can be known that the victim was administered with cm per month from July 2013 to September 2013. Furthermore, according to the body photographs taken during the investigation process, a large number of injection countries were discovered without being able to sell both arms of the victim, and the supply of bucks or bucks was found to have been carried out several times on the part of the victim’s arms and caused side effects such as booming the victim.

(3) As a result of the examination of drug reaction on the Defendant C’s hair of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (Collection on December 19, 2013), Defendant C administered a penphone between June 2013 and December 2013, and Defendant C administered a penphone from 2 cm (No. 1-1), 2cm through 4cm (No. 1-2), 4cm through end (No. 1-3).

(4) According to the trial card of the Seoul Central District Court case No. 2013Kadan5580 with respect to Defendant D, the results of the narcotics reaction on Defendant D’s hair extracted on September 4, 2013, and the reaction to train phiphones were found to have been administered prior to September 4, 2013.

(5) Defendant B was indicted on the basis of the Seoul Northern Site Act 2013Gohap260, 344 (combined), and 346 (Joint) due to the charge of medication and rape, which came to know through the “AU,” which is a mobile phone fishing case, and “AT,” which is the Internet hosting site, and was sentenced to 7 years of imprisonment on December 20, 2013 (the defendant B appealed against the above judgment and appealed as Seoul High Court 2014No151). The above criminal law is almost the same as the criminal law of Defendant B, which the victim stated in this case.

C) Supporting the credibility of the statements made by the persons concerned

The victim’s statements that correspond to each of the facts charged in the instant case are supported by the credibility of the statements given by the relevant persons from various facts or circumstances, as follows.

(1) As to Defendant A

① Defendant A had administered philophones with Defendant B, etc. during the second examination process of suspect interrogation (2013 Ma430 pages 226 of the investigation records), and had been aware of some facts about the administration of philophones, together with the victim in the telephones. While the Defendant reported philophones, the victim was limited to about 2 hours of sexual intercourse (2013 Ma430 pages 229), and some of the facts charged that the victim had sexual contact with the victim were found (20 hours of the investigation records No. 2013 Ma430 pages). ② The Defendant A testified in this court that “Defendant A remains in the house of Defendant A,” and Q asked the reasons why the above Defendant was unable to do so, and all of the Defendants’ statements made to Defendant A to the effect that the victim was credibility and credibility of the Defendant’s testimony made to Defendant A.

(2) As to Defendant B

① Defendant B made a statement that he had sexual intercourse twice in the interrogation process of the suspect at the “P” (2013 Gohap431, 287) and that he had sexual intercourse with the victim even after the “Kmotour” (after that, Defendant B made a statement that he had no sexual intercourse except for the sexual intercourse in the Kmotour). ② Defendant B made a statement that he had no sexual intercourse with the victim during the second interrogation process of the suspect in the prosecution, with Defendant B, etc. (2013 Gohap431, 241, the investigation record), and ③ during the first interrogation process of the suspect, Defendant C made a statement that he had no sexual intercourse with the victim during the interrogation process of the suspect, “B” was a 30th examination of the suspect, and “B” made a statement that he had no sexual intercourse with the victim during the interrogation process of the suspect’s first time, and that he made a statement that he had no sexual intercourse with the victim during the interrogation process of the suspect No. 231, 2314.

(3) As to Defendant C

The defendant C found the victim to "AX hotel in the first interrogation process of the suspect examination," and called "B and the victim were in the room," and "whether it is difficult to insert the victim's sexual organ with the same one." The victim stated that the victim's body was "not to be able to be able to be able to do so" and rh to write the body in his hand (2013 Gohap432 investigation records) during the second interrogation process of the prosecutor's office, and that "the victim's sexual organ was changed to her father's son and 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 above statement was supported by the victim's sexual interview (2013 Gohap432 investigation records, 301).

D) The motive of false statements is weak.

(1) The Defendants asserts to the effect that “the victim received money in return for the receipt of a false statement by the victim’s own shares of AS, which are in the original relationship with the Defendants.”

(2) There is evidence as shown in the above argument by the defendants, but there is no position to know whether the defendants committed the crime of this case because the defendants were not the defendants, victims, or witnesses, and the prosecutor pointed out that the prosecutor pointed out that "AY made false information that "the facts were administered when the drugs were administered" at home, "IY made false information that they were raped when they did not rape," "AY made a formal statement that it was difficult to obtain," "AY received money by making a false information about the meaning of "AY will receive money", but it is difficult to find the credibility of this statement in light of the following: "AY is not a false report about whether the facts charged of this case are false or not," "AY is a false report about narcotics", "the false report about narcotics", and "IY's statement about whether it was false or not there is a false report about the facts charged of this case."

(3) In addition, the Defendants submitted a record of the conversations between the victim and AY and AR (as women's fends of the Defendant C, it is difficult to accept the record of the conversations between the victim and the victim (which is currently pending in trial after being indicted by Seoul Western District Court 2013Ma3457) on suspicion of violating the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., but ① the victim's answer to "Nan" as "Nan", and again, the victim asked "Nan" as "Nan", and the victim asked "Nan" as "Nan", and the victim's answer" cannot be seen as just the answer to the victim's statement in the context of unilaterally speaking favorable to the Defendants, so it is difficult to see that the victim's statement is sufficient to have the victim's statement "on the grounds of the victim's testimony that he or she would have expressed" as "on the ground of his or her oral testimony or opinion," and thus, it is difficult to reverse the content of "A" as "the victim's statement to the victim's statement".

(4) Furthermore, the victim’s statement to the effect that the victim received KRW 1 million from AS (the victim stated to the effect that he received KRW 1 million from AS medical expenses in this Act) cannot be deemed to have received the payment for false statement; ② The victim’s study abroad several times and his father works as the leader of a large enterprise, etc. does not seem to lack the victim’s house situation; thus, it is difficult for the victim to have made a false statement for four defendants to receive KRW 1 million. ③ The crime of this case began with the investigation by AS and Q’s statement during the investigation process, and the victim’s statement to the effect that it was impossible for the victim to consistently attend the investigation agency to have made a false statement in consideration of the fact that the victim made a false statement to the victim at any time after the victim made a false statement to the extent that it was impossible for the victim to have made a false statement to have made a false statement to the extent that the victim made a false statement to the victim at any time during the investigation process (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3203, Dec. 22, 20005).

E) Possibility of fabrication of a livelihood card

(1) 피고인들이 제출한 생일축하카드에는, "To. D 2013. 8. 15. Thurs. D 아저씨의 생일을 축하드립니다~!! 이쁘지도 않는 나 걱정해줘서 고마워요~^^ (태양 표시) From. I ♡"라고 기재되어 있다.

(2) It is true that the body of the body written on the above life-long card seems to be similar to the body of the victim written on the written statement of the victim on the face of the body. However, in light of the fact that the body of the body written on the above life-long card is forged or that even if the body of the body written on the above life-long card was prepared by the victim, it appears that anyone can easily use the body of the victim, and that the body of the body appears to have been written on the above life-long card, and that the victim's life-long card was first written in this court, and that the body of the body of the victim is similar to the body of the victim.

3. Determination on the Defendants’ individual arguments

A. Judgment on Defendant A’s assertion

1) Summary of Defendant A’s assertion

① Since the result of the examination of drug reaction on Defendant A’s hair (the hair from the mother on August 22, 2013 to the 10cm) of the National Science Investigation Agency was proved to have not administered a penphone between June 2013 and August 2013 (hereinafter “instant charges”), Defendant A had not administered a penphone at least before the date of the instant charges (hereinafter “Defendant A’s assertion 1”). ② Defendant A administered a penphone at the time of the instant crimes, and on September 1, 2013, from the day of the instant crimes, the phone was not administered, and on September 1, 2013, the mixed phone was administered. However, Defendant A had already been prosecuted on September 1, 2013 by Seoul East East District Court Decision 2013Ma2327, the part of the charges charged against Defendant A should be dismissed.

2) Determination as to the first argument

A) According to the inquiry reply by the Seoul Central Tran Police Station, it can be seen that the results of the narcotics reaction test conducted by Defendant A of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (the taken on August 22, 2013) and the voice reaction of narcotics from the hair hair to 10cc from the hair.

B) However, even though Defendant A recognized the fact that he administered chophones at his own home on September 1, 2013, Defendant A was aware of the fact that he administered chophones. However, in consideration of the result of the narcotics reaction conducted by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation on the hair of Defendant A on December 10, 2013, there was a voice reaction on narcotics from the climatic hair to 9cm. ② In the case of the narcotics reaction test on the hair, Defendant A did not appear to have a voice reaction solely on the ground that there was a reliable statement by the victim on August 22, 2013.

Therefore, Defendant A’s above assertion is without merit.

3) Judgment on the second argument

The Seoul Eastern District Court case No. 2013Mo2327 against Defendant A stated that the Defendant A administered phiphones at the home on September 1, 2013, and among the instant cases, the facts charged regarding narcotics against Defendant A stated that the charges regarding narcotics against Defendant A "the defendant transferred multiple phiphones from June 20, 2013 to August 20, 2013 and administered phiphones" and its basic facts are completely different. Therefore, the indictment against Defendant A does not constitute double prosecution, and the above assertion by Defendant A is without merit without any need to further examine.

B. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion

1) Summary of Defendant B’s assertion

Although Defendant B had a sexual intercourse with the victim around June 20, 2013, Defendant B had a sexual intercourse, it is nothing more than a sexual intercourse with the victim by paying KRW 1.50,000 to the victim in return for the payment of that amount. After all, Defendant B was in a personal relationship with the victim, but it is true that Defendant B did not move several maternitys together with the victim. However, this is due to the fact that Defendant B and the victim were in a personal relationship with the victim, or that Defendant B was forced to attract the victim and did not have been administered or raped.

2) Determination

① However, according to Defendant B’s assertion, the victim allowed sexual intercourse in return for receiving KRW 1.50,00 from Defendant B, and developed into Defendant B’s personal relationship in a short period without any special opportunity, and thus, is very exceptional; ② the victim in a personal relationship stated that “the Defendant B committed the administration of crophones and the crime of rape several times without any obvious reason.” Thus, it is difficult to easily understand it; ③ Furthermore, Defendant B, in a personal relationship, c) wn the victim with Defendant A and transferred the victim to other Defendants, and thus, it is difficult to understand it formally; ④ Defendant B committed the administration of crophones and the crime of rape against multiple women under the same multiple laws as seen earlier. In light of the above, the above argument by the Defendant B is entirely persuasive.

C. Judgment on Defendant C’s assertion

1) Summary of Defendant C’s assertion

① Since the date and time of the charge against Defendant C’s crime falls from July 2013 to September 2013, the narcotics reaction test for Defendant C’s hair extracted on December 19, 2013 ought to take place in the range of 4cm to 6cm from the maternity. However, the result of the examination by the National Science Investigation and Investigation Agency of Korea shows that the Defendant C’s phonephone was administered from around April 2013 to around June 2013, to around June 19, 2013 (hereinafter “the victim’s phonephone”) and the victim’s phone medication cannot be readily concluded to have asserted any similarity between Defendant C and the victim’s phone medication (hereinafter “the victim’s phone medication”).

2) Determination as to the first argument

The result of the narcotics reaction test for Defendant C’s hair (the extraction from December 19, 2013) by the National Science Investigation Agency showed that the narcotics training reaction was conducted from the mother to the cut hair of not less than 4 cm (the last day). The narcotics reaction test for the hair generally estimates the time of medication based on the empirical statistics that the hair is harmful to the degree of not less than 1 cm a month, and it does not mean that at that time it is highly likely that the phone was administered, and in itself, it does not mean that the time of administration of opphones can be clearly specified. Ultimately, the narcotics training reaction was conducted from the hair hair of the Defendant C’s hair to the end of not less than 4 cm or 6 cm (the last day). Accordingly, there is no possibility that the Defendant C administered the opon from July 2013 to September 2013, the victim’s argument that the opon was more likely than the above Defendant C’s above charges.

3) Judgment on the second argument

① Unlike the other Defendants, Defendant C’s sexual assault behavior, it appears that it was done in the form of similarity, rather than in the form of sexual intercourse, rather than in the form of the victim’s sexual intercourse, rather than in the form of the victim’s sexual intercourse, it appears that the credibility of the victim’s statement can be recognized. ② Defendant C stated that “In the first interrogation process, it is difficult for the victim to write the victim’s sexual organ because it is difficult for him to write the inner organ with the same one.” Defendant C stated that “I cannot put it into the sexual organ of a woman of which the frame is small (2013Da432, No. 290, 292).” Defendant C stated that the victim’s sexual organ was not only the victim’s sexual organ but also the victim’s sexual organ was merely the victim’s body, and there seems to be no reason for the victim’s refusal to write it into the victim’s sexual organ on the ground of the victim’s body’s refusal to write it into the victim’s body.

4) Judgment on the third argument

It is true that the victim made several calls and letters to Defendant C. However, under the abnormal state where the victim was forced to take a phone-phone medication and rapes in several times, the victim could not expect the victim as it is. ② In particular, the victim found Defendant B as "Kel" at the Internet hosting site, which actively attempted escape or did not request rescue. ④ Since the victim was administered a phone-phone medication, it appears that the victim might have suffered confusion in values by giving rise to fear of considerable punishment or punishment, ③ The victim was under intimidation to the victim, so it appears that the victim would have made efforts to know about the Defendants, ④ The victim could not be readily concluded that Defendant C and the victim did not have any voluntary sexual assault since there was a lot of damage to Defendant C and the victim.

D. Judgment on Defendant D’s assertion

1) Summary of Defendant D’s assertion

① On September 27, 2013, the victim stated to the effect that “the victim was forced to administer phiphones by force and rape” from Defendant D on September 27, 2013. The victim stated that Defendant D was detained on September 4, 2013 and released on October 24, 2013, changed the date and time of the crime to August 2013. The victim’s statement on Defendant D was difficult to recognize its credibility (hereinafter referred to as “the victim’s statement”). ② Defendant D’s 20 years of imprisonment with prison labor for 2013 years of the suspended sentence on September 2, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the first assertion”). Defendant D’s 20 years of suspended sentence on September 2, 2013; Defendant D’s 20 years of imprisonment with prison labor for 2013 of the Seoul Central District Court Decision on September 24, 2013.

2) Determination as to the first argument

A) On September 27, 2013, the victim initially stated at the investigative agency that “the victim was forced to administer phiphones by compulsory medication and rape from Defendant D,” but it is true that Defendant D was detained on September 4, 2013 and released from the military court on September 10, 2013. The date and time of the crime was changed on August 2013.

나) 그러나 ① 앞서 본 바와 같이 이 사건 범행은 16세의 나이 어린 피해자가 2, 3개월의 짧은 기간 동안 여러 명의 피고인들로부터 수십 차례나 집중적으로 필로폰을 투약 당하고 아울러 강간 범행도 당한 특수성이 있는 점, ② 피해자가 수십 차례의 모든 범행에 관하여 구체적인 날짜를 정확히 기억한다는 것은 사실상 불가능해 보이는 점, ③ 그럼에도 피해자는 피고인 D의 범행에 관하여 '피고인 D가 제 가슴을 빨다가 갑자기 제 팔을 잡아당기며 "얘, 내꺼야"라며 저를 껴 안길래, 제가 "숨이 막힌다"고 조금만 풀어달라고 하자, 제 복부와 옆구리 및 머리를 왼손 주먹으로 강하게 쳤습니 다', 'AE 모텔에 도착한 후 근처에 있는 AZ에서 커피를 마신 다음 피고인 D가 "옷만 갈아 입고 나온다"며 같이 가자고 하였습니다. 방으로 들어가자마자 피고인 D가 제 뺨을 때리고 주먹과 발로 제 온몸을 떄렸습니다. 때리면서 저에게 "중국 갈거냐"고 물어 보고 "간다"고 하면 때리고 "가지 않는다"고 하면 때리지 않았습니다'(2013고합433호 수사기록 46, 49, 50쪽)와 같이 상당히 구체적인 진술을 하고 있는 점 등에다가 앞서 2.항에서 본 판단을 종합해보면, 피해자가 피고인 D의 범행 일시를 다소 혼동하여 잘못 진술했다는 사정만으로 피해자 진술의 신빙성을 부정할 수는 없다. 따라서 피고인D의 위 주장은 이유 없다.

3) Judgment on the second argument

The Seoul Central District Court case No. 2013Kadan5580 against Defendant D referred to in the Seoul Central District Court case "the defendant D administered a mixed phone at his own house on September 2, 2013." Paragraph (2) of the facts charged against Defendant D in the instant case is that the defendant D administered a penphone at his own house on August 2, 2013, and the basic facts are not identical. Accordingly, since the res judicata effect of the judgment against Defendant D does not fall under the facts charged against Defendant D (Article 29 at the market). Thus, the argument for acquittal of Defendant D is without merit without further review.

4. Conclusion

As above, since the victim's statement directly consistent with each of the facts charged of this case can be recognized as credibility, if comprehensive consideration of each of the evidence mentioned above is given to the victim's statement, each of the facts charged of this case can be admitted. Therefore, the defendants' above assertion is without merit.

Reasons for sentencing

I. Common circumstances to the Defendants

1. Article 10 of the Constitution provides that “All citizens shall have dignity and value as human beings and have the right to pursue happiness. The State shall have the duty to confirm and guarantee the fundamental human rights of an individual.” As the premise of human dignity and the right to pursue happiness, the State shall declare and guarantee the right to sexual integrity, sexual self-determination, etc. of the body as fundamental human rights of an infertility. This is the fundamental value and human rights of both members of the society as well as the non-states. Socially, sexual violence crimes, in particular, sex crimes against children and juveniles have spread awareness that they should be fully inferred in society, and punishment for sexual crimes against children and juveniles, which are to be carefully protected by the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, is strengthened. This is because sexual crimes against children and juveniles, which merely cause harm to children and juveniles, and thus, are likely to cause serious harm and harm to children and juveniles in the future, and thus, it is likely that a child and juveniles’ act may not be subject to social harm and harm, such as physical harm and harm to children and juveniles.

2. The Defendants, who are merely 16 years of age, put the victim into a swamp of a crime where the victim could not come to the victim by administering and committing rapeing phiphones, and further handing over the victim to another Defendants in order. In particular, according to the increase in the number of phiphones administered to the victim, the victim is also suffering from confusion in values that should come to the wind exposed to the toxicity of phiphonephones, thereby having contacted or friendly attitude toward the Defendants. The Defendants were used as a means to deny the instant crime. The Defendants did not have any effort to seek a buphone or recover damage. The Defendants and their family members, who suffered mental and physical pain which could not be said to be caused by the instant crime, request strong punishment against the Defendants.

Ⅱ. Individual circumstances of the Defendants

[Defendant A]

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for not less than five years to 45 years;

2. Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment for a period of six years to twenty-four years.

(a) Basic crime: The crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape) under paragraph (8) above;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape, Rape, etc. by Relatives Relations)

[Special Person] A victim, leap who is vulnerable to a crime

(b) Offenses with the highest range of sentence among other crimes: Offenses against the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse referred to in paragraph (6).

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape/Special Rape, etc. in Connection with Relatives)

[Special Person] A victim, leap who is vulnerable to a crime

(c) Offenses with the upper limit of sentence range second among other crimes: Offenses of Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Pollution against Sexual Abuse (Rape) under paragraph (5) of the holding;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape and Special Rape in Connection with Relatives, etc.)

[Special Person] A victim, leap who is vulnerable to a crime

(d) Scope of recommending punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: 6 years from 24 to 9 months [the maximum of the sentence range for the crimes committed during the period of 6 years =13 (the maximum of the sentence range for the crimes committed during the period of 13 years + 13 years (the maximum of the sentence range for the crimes with the highest maximum of the sentence range among other crimes) + 1/2 + 13 years (the upper limit of the sentence range for the crimes with the second highest of the sentence range among other crimes)];

3. Determination of sentence;

A. Although Defendant A was sentenced to a fine of seven times due to a violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act, he was sentenced to a fine of seven times, and was not guilty of living, Defendant A administered 37 or forced phiphones, and raped the victim seven times or seven times or more (in view of the fact that the charges have been reduced in line with the frequency of the crime in which the victim clearly memorys, the frequency of actual crimes are more likely to exceed the number of times). In particular, Defendant A raped the victim who was forced to administer narcotics with serious harm to the body of the victim, and was virtually unable to resist, and raped most of the crimes committed with Defendant B.

B. Nevertheless, Defendant A: (a) was divided into the instant crime; (b) did not request the victim to use the letter; (c) denied all the instant crime; and (d) caused secondary injury to the victim by having the victim studying abroad present himself/herself in this court and present himself/herself to give testimony; and (c) the victim and his/her family members request strong punishment against Defendant A; (d) even if the victim and his/her family members request a strong punishment against Defendant A, it is inevitable to sentence Defendant A heavy punishment.

C. The above circumstances comprehensively consider the Defendant A’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, the circumstances and means of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., and determine the sentence as ordered.

Defendant B

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 45 years; and

2. Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment for a period of six years to twenty-four years.

(a) Basic crime: The crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape) under paragraph (18) above;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape (Rape at least 13 years of age)> Type 2 (Rape/Special Rape, etc. by Relatives Relations)

[Special Person] A victim, leap who is vulnerable to a crime

(b) Offenses with the highest range of sentence among other crimes: Offenses against the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse under paragraph (16) of the holding;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape by Relatives and Rape, etc. by Relatives Relations)

[Special Person] A victim, leap who is vulnerable to a crime

(c) Offenses with a upper limit of the range of sentence among other crimes: Offenses of Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children from Sexual Abuse (Rape) of the year of child and cleaning referred to in paragraph (15).

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape by Relatives and Rape, etc. by Relatives Relations)

[Special Person] A victim, leap who is vulnerable to a crime

(d) Scope of recommending punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: 6 years to 24 years [the maximum of the sentence scope for the crimes committed during the period of 13 years (the maximum of the sentence scope for the crimes committed during the period of 13 years) + 13 years and 6 months (the maximum of the sentence scope for the crimes with the highest maximum of the sentence scope among other crimes) + 1/2 + 13 years and 6 months (the upper limit of the sentence scope for the crimes with the highest maximum of the sentence scope among other crimes)];

3. Determination of sentence;

A. Defendant B: (a) was punished several times due to habitual frauds, etc.; (b) was sentenced to a fine and imprisonment with prison labor for life; (c) was 37 times or forced to administer phiphones to the victim; and (d) was raped on seven occasions or seven occasions as indicated in the judgment (in view of the fact that the prosecutor and the victim reduced the charges in line with the frequency of the crime that the victim clearly memorys, the frequency of the actual crime is more likely to exceed the number of times of the crime). In particular, the victim, who was forced to administer narcotics with serious harm to the body of the victim; (d) was raped with the victim; and (e) the rape was committed with the victim most of the crime committed by the Defendant A and most of the rape. Furthermore, Defendant B’s responsibility is very excessive in that the victim provided the victim with the beginning of the crime.

B. Nevertheless, Defendant B: (a) was divided into the instant crime; (b) did not request the victim to use the letter; (c) denied all the instant crime; and (d) allowed the victim studying abroad to appear in this court and give testimony; and further, (c) denied the victim’s concept of mutual aid by receiving money; and (d) denied the victim’s concept of mutual aid. The victim and his family members requested strong punishment against Defendant B; and (d) the sentence of heavy punishment against Defendant B is inevitable.

C. The above circumstances comprehensively consider all of the sentencing conditions, including Defendant B’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, the circumstances and means of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., and determine the sentence as ordered.

[Defendant C]

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 45 years; and

2. Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment for a period of six years to twenty-four years.

(a) Basic crime: The crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape) under paragraph (23) of the judgment;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape, Rape, etc. by Relatives Relations)

[Special Person] A victim who is vulnerable to any virtual and dynamic infringement, or a crime;

(b) Offenses with the highest range of sentence among other crimes: Offenses against the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (similar act) under paragraph (27) above;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape/Special Rape, etc. based on Relatives Relations)

[Special Person] A victim who is vulnerable to any virtual and dynamic infringement, or a crime;

(c) Offenses with the upper limit of the range of sentence among other crimes: Offenses of Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children from Sexual Abuse (similar Acts) of the year of child and cleaning referred to in paragraph (26).

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape and Special Rape in Connection with Relatives, etc.)

[Special Person] A victim who is vulnerable to any virtual and dynamic infringement, or a crime;

(d) Scope of recommending punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: 6 years to 24 years [the maximum of the sentence scope for the crimes committed during the period of 13 years (the maximum of the sentence scope for the crimes committed during the period of 13 years) + 13 years and 6 months (the maximum of the sentence scope for the crimes with the highest maximum of the sentence scope among other crimes) + 1/2 + 13 years and 6 months (the upper limit of the sentence scope for the crimes with the highest maximum of the sentence scope among other crimes)];

3. Determination of sentence;

A. Defendant C administered 13 or compulsory philophones to the victim, as indicated in the judgment, even though having been punished several times due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. and sentenced him to imprisonment with prison labor, and was raped eight times or more (in view of the fact that the prosecutor reduced the charges in line with the frequency of the crime in which the victim clearly memorys, the number of actual crimes are more likely to exceed the number of times). In particular, the crime of rape and quasi-Rape committed by forcing the victim to administer narcotics with serious harm to the body of the victim and de facto in a state of non-competence, and the crime of rape and quasi-Rape committed by the victim was committed between the Defendant D and the victim, or by taking the part of the victim’s drinking for several times, is extremely poor.

B. Nevertheless, Defendant C: (a) was divided into the instant crime; (b) had the victim be present at this court and gave testimony by denying all the instant crime; and (c) had the victim studying abroad sell the victim by “psyunchers,” etc.; and (d) forced the victim to reverse his statement directly or through female friends, etc.; and (c) caused additional damage to the victim. In particular, even after the detention, Defendant C faces with Defendant D and horses separately detained through the external contact network; and (d) the circumstances after the commission of the crime are very good. The victim and his family members request strong punishment against Defendant C. It is inevitable to sentence a heavy sentence against Defendant C.

C. The above circumstances comprehensively consider the Defendant C’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, the circumstances and means of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., and determine the sentence as ordered.

[Defendant D]

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 45 years; and

2. Scope of recommending sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six years nor more than twenty years to Nov. 20.

(a) Basic crimes: Crimes of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape) under paragraph (28) of the judgment;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for the Specific Aggravated Punishment (Rape, Rape, etc. in Connection with Relatives) of Type 2 (Special Rape, etc. in Connection with Relatives)

[Special Person] A victim who is vulnerable to any virtual and dynamic infringement, or a crime;

(b) Offenses with the highest range of sentence among other crimes: Offenses in violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape) under Article 30 of the judgment;

[Scope of Recommendation] General Criteria for rape of Type 2 (Rape/Special Rape, etc. in Connection with Relatives)

[Special Person] A victim who is vulnerable to any virtual and dynamic infringement, or a crime;

(c) Offenses against which the upper limit of sentence scope is higher than the second among other crimes: Offenses against the Act on the Interest of Narcotics, Etc. referred to in paragraph (30) of the holding.

[Scope of Recommendation] Medication, simple possession, etc., the basic area (one hundred months to two years) of imprisonment

【Special Convicted Person】

(d) Scope of recommending punishment based on the standards for handling multiple crimes: 6 years to 20 years [the maximum of the scope of punishment for basic crimes] = 6 years to 13 years + 13 years and 6 months (the maximum of the scope of punishment for other crimes with the highest maximum of the scope of punishment among other crimes) + 1/2 + 2 years (the maximum of the scope of punishment for other crimes with the second highest maximum of the scope of punishment)];

3. Determination of sentence;

A. Defendant D, even though having been punished several times due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. and having been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., provided that the victim was forced to take a penphone, and raped twice by the victim, as indicated in the judgment below. In particular, the victim, who was in a state of de facto impossibility to resist the victim’s body, had been administered by force, and was in a state of de facto failure to resist, was raped, and some of the rape crimes committed with Defendant C are very poor.

B. Nevertheless, Defendant D: (a) was divided into the instant crime; (b) did not request the victim to use the letter; (c) denied all the instant crime; and (d) caused secondary damage to the victim by allowing the victim studying abroad to appear in this court and give testimony; and (c) further, Defendant D’s assertion of Defendant A, some of the confessions made during the prosecution investigation process, thereby denying the crime again; and (d) the circumstances after the crime are not good. The victim and his family members demand strong punishment against Defendant D; (c) the sentence of heavy punishment against Defendant D is inevitable.

C. According to the above circumstances, all of the sentencing conditions, including the sentence imposed by Defendant D, Defendant D’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, the circumstances and means of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the sentence imposed by Defendant D due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Registration of Personal Information

The Defendants are subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Exposure, in cases where a conviction becomes final and conclusive in relation to a sexual crime during the instant crime, and the Defendants are obligated to submit personal information to the competent authority pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act.

Judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Ha Sung-woo

Judge Park Sang-hoon

1) The volume of philophones not covered by philophones is deemed to be one-time medication of philophones.

2) Defendant C confessions all the facts charged in the case No. 2014 high-priced73.

3) The above statement of Q is admissible as it constitutes "a statement made by a person other than the defendant on the trial date of the defendant" in Article 316 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the remaining defendants correspond to "a statement made by a person other than the defendant on the trial date of the defendant, the contents of which are another person other than the defendant" in Article 316 (2) of the same Act, and as long as the rest of the defendants are present in this court and are judged in court, evidence shall not be admissible as evidence of guilt.

4) It appears that P is " Qelel" in P.

5) It appears to be ‘VMoel' or ‘XMoel'.

6) In principle, the sentencing guidelines do not apply to each of the crimes in the judgment of Defendant D in relation to concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, but the sentencing guidelines will be examined in a reference sense for the decision of sentencing.