Defendant

Kim Purification (prosecutions) and a trial

Law Firm Sejong, Attorneys Kim Han-han et al.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

180,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge shall be ordered to be paid provisionally.

【Criminal Power】

On February 2, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a special injury at Daejeon District Court. On January 31, 2017, the Defendant completed the enforcement of the said sentence at a public prison.

【Criminal Facts】

The defendant is a member of the △△△ branch, who is a violence organization in the Daejeon area.

1. Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Good Offices);

The Defendant, from August 9, 2017 to November 1, 2011 of the same month, recruited sex purchase by mobile phone hosting display, recruited 1.50,00 won from them, and received 150,000 won from them, and transferred Nonindicted Party 1 (the age 13), which is a juvenile, to a sexual traffic place, and had the said Nonindicted Party 1 conduct sex purchase and sex intercourse six times over six times, and arranged sexual traffic, such as raising profits by receiving 30,000 won per time as intermediary expenses, total of 180,000 won per time during the said period.

2. Violation of the Employment Security Act;

Any person who intends to conduct domestic fee-charging job placement services shall register with the Governor of a Special Self-Governing Province or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu having jurisdiction

Nevertheless, from August 11, 2017 to August 14, 2017, the Defendant, without registering with the competent authority, was running domestic fee-charging job placement services, such as: (a) introduction of Nonindicted Party 1, a juvenile, into a △△ singing in Daejeon; (b) introduction of Nonindicted Party 1, a juvenile, into a singing book in Daejeon; and (c) receipt of KRW 10,00 per hour per introduction.

3. Violation of the Juvenile Protection Act;

No person shall, for the purpose of profit-making, have juveniles drink alcoholic beverages with customers, provide entertainment to customers by singing or dancing, or arrange or instigate such acts.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at the same time and place as in paragraph (2), introduced Nonindicted 1, a juvenile, as in paragraph (2), to provide entertainment services, and received brokerage fees, etc., by allowing the juvenile to drink with the customer, or to provide entertainment services by singing or dancing.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of Nonindicted Party 1

1. The prosecutor’s statement concerning Nonindicted 1

1. The statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 in the police statement against Nonindicted Party 9 and Nonindicted Party 1

1. Each police statement made against Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2

1. Statement made by Non-Indicted 1 in the suspect interrogation protocol (2 times, questioning by the public)

1. Investigation report (related to the suspect's △△△ staff);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Each investigation report (report on confirmation of information on confinement of a criminal suspect), and inquiry into criminal records;

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

Article 15(1)2 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (including the occupation of brokerage business for juveniles, including the occupation of brokerage business for juveniles), Article 56 of the Juvenile Protection Act, Article 30 Subparag. 2 of the Juvenile Protection Act (including the occupation of brokerage business for juveniles for profit-making purposes), Article 47 Subparag. 1 of the Employment Security Act, Article 19(1) of the Employment Security Act (a), collectively, the occupation of running free or fee-charging job placement business

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act: Provided, That the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act shall apply to a violation of the Act against the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Good Offices, etc.)

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 within the scope of Article 42 of the Criminal Act concerning the punishment prescribed for a violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Mediation, etc.) with the largest penalty]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following circumstances considered as favorable to the reasons for sentencing)

1. Order to complete programs;

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

1. Additional collection:

The latter part of Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic (the amount acquired by the defendant through the arrangement of commercial sex acts)

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the assertion

The Defendant did not arrange for sexual traffic to Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 1 did not know that he was a minor.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to whether the defendant arranged sexual traffic to non-indicted 1 who is a minor

In determining the credibility of the statements made by victims, etc. supporting the facts charged, the credibility of the statements shall be assessed in consideration of all the circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance, attitude, and penology of the witness who is taking an oath before a judge, and the penology of the witness who is participating in the statement in the open court after being sworn before a judge, and the witness examination protocol, including the penology of the witness who directly observe various circumstances that make it difficult to record (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). Since the contents of the statements are consistent and specific in the main part, there are no parts inconsistent and inconsistent with the empirical rule, and there is no motive or reason unfavorable to the defendant in light of the empirical rule, and so long as the motive or reason to make a false statement unfavorable to the defendant is not clearly revealed, the credibility of the statements should not be rejected unless it appears somewhat consistent with the part concerning the statements made in the witness examination, or it is somewhat uncertain (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1084.).

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence examined by this court, the defendant is recognized as having arranged sexual traffic to non-indicted 1 who is a minor.

1) Non-Indicted 1’s statement that is specific and consistent and reliable

Non-Indicted 1 consistently recruited the Defendant from the investigative agency to this court by using the mobile phone-type display “○○○○”, and consistently stated that Non-Indicted 1 would bring 30,000 won out of the sexual traffic price to the sexual traffic place. In particular, it is difficult to understand that Non-Indicted 1, who was 13 years of age at the time of the instant case, did not directly experience the Defendant’s statement on the method of soliciting the purchase of sex, the content of the secret that Non-Indicted 1 exchanged with the Defendant or Non-Indicted 3, and the Defendant’s response attitude that was scheduled to take when the instant crime was committed.

2) The absence of a motive to mislead the defendant

If the defendant asserts, Nonindicted Party 1 made a false statement and made a false statement to the defendant who is a member of the violent organization. However, Nonindicted Party 3, who introduced Nonindicted Party 1 to the defendant, stated that there was no problem with the defendant's monetary problem, etc. during the day on which the defendant was operated by Nonindicted Party 1 (Evidence No. 301) and the defendant also did not point out any motive that Nonindicted Party 1 might not mislead the defendant (Evidence No. 301). Furthermore, Nonindicted Party 1 stated in the police and the prosecutor's office that he was aware of the fact that he was aware of another person's resident registration certificate of the defendant, and Nonindicted Party 3 made a statement favorable to the defendant in this court, stating that "the defendant was aware that he was a minor," after Nonindicted Party 3 became aware of the fact that he was aware of another person's resident registration certificate in the prosecutor's office that he had made a statement to the defendant that he was a minor, there is no reason to reverse the defendant's statement in favor of the defendant.

3) Statement of Nonindicted 3’s investigative agency with low credibility

Nonindicted 3 made a statement to the effect that Nonindicted 1 was not the Defendant but Nonindicted 2, which had the investigative agency met the conditions. However, the said statement is difficult to believe in light of the following circumstances.

① Recognizing that Nonindicted 2 had attempted to arrange sexual traffic to Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 2 stated that the arrangement of sexual traffic to Nonindicted 1 is denied, as well as that Nonindicted 1’s face is not memory.

② Nonindicted 3 stated at the police that “No one was released from the Facebook the 20 foot resident registration certificate that Nonindicted 4 called Nonindicted 4, but that Nonindicted 4 was similar to that of Nonindicted 1, therefore, the Defendant ought to report to the Defendant as Nonindicted 1’s identification card” (Evidence Records 292, 395 pages), but Nonindicted 3 stated that there was no such fact (Evidence Records 362 pages).

③ On October 26, 2017, Nonindicted 3 told the police who was investigating the instant case to the effect that “Nonindicted 1 had been engaged in one day by singing, which was done through Nonindicted 2, not by the Defendant, but through Nonindicted 2.” On October 31, 2017, Nonindicted 3 told Nonindicted 1 to the effect that “I am to the police, and I am to the police, and I am to the police,” and made a false speech to sing the Defendant. However, it is true that the Defendant told Nonindicted 1 to sing the Defendant. However, it appears that Nonindicted 3 was able to make a statement in favor of the Defendant by going beyond the suspicion of being suspected by the Defendant, such as the reversal of the previous statement (Evidence record 293 pages).

4) Determination as to the defendant's assertion

A) The Defendant asserts that Nonindicted 1’s vehicle on board at the time Nonindicted 1 met with the condition that Nonindicted 2 was used by Nonindicted 2, who arranged commercial sex acts, is Nonindicted 2. In full view of the images of Nonindicted 1’s legal statement, Nonindicted 2 PUV vehicle caps (Evidence No. 1) by cutting down Nonindicted 1’s photo, the vehicle on board at the time Nonindicted 1 met with the condition that Nonindicted 2 was a vehicle used by Nonindicted 2. However, Nonindicted 1 stated that the Defendant was using two vehicles, including the said vehicle, and even if the vehicle used at the time Nonindicted 1 met with the condition, it is possible for the Defendant to use the said UV vehicle with the right to use the said UV vehicle from Nonindicted 2, even if it was not owned by the Defendant, this does not interfere with the recognition of the criminal facts indicated in the judgment.

B) The Defendant asserts that the Defendant did not have any type of text message claiming that Nonindicted 1 sent Nonindicted 1 to the Gaphone used by the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not have engaged in commercial sex acts. According to the digital evidence analysis report (Evidence No. 4-1-1) submitted by the Defendant, according to the fact that Nonindicted 1 stated in the details of the restoration of text messages of the mobile phone (type: iPhone, telephone number (number omitted) used by the Defendant, the fact that Nonindicted 1 sent the text message to Nonindicted 3, but the fact that Nonindicted 1 stated that the text message was sent to Nonindicted 3’s mobile phone, and that the Defendant also used other mobile phone than the above mobile phone, does not interfere with the recognition of the criminal facts in the judgment.

B. Determination as to whether the Defendant recognized Nonindicted 1 as a minor

In light of the legislative purpose of the Juvenile Protection Act, the proprietor of a business establishment harmful to juveniles, such as entertainment taverns, shall not employ juveniles for the purpose of protecting juveniles. As such, in the event that the proprietor of an entertainment drinking house employs employees at the relevant entertainment business establishment, he/she shall verify the eligible age based on resident registration certificates or evidence with public probative value of age to the extent similar thereto. If it is doubtful that the photographs and objects of the resident registration certificates presented by the eligible person are different, the number of juveniles are concealed in their status and age, and employment of entertainment business establishments is reduced in many cases, considering the vulnerable employment circumstances of the entertainment business, etc., it is reasonable to view that the proprietor as a business owner is obliged to take additional age verification measures, such as making children in detail comparison with those on resident registration certificates, or giving out their addresses or resident registration numbers on resident registration certificates, etc. for the purpose of protecting children and juveniles against sexual traffic (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do2714, Feb. 28, 2002).

However, even according to the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant is acknowledged to have known that Nonindicted 1 was a minor on the external side through his appearance and behavior, in full view of the following facts: (a) Nonindicted 1 was aware that he was well aware of, or did not have confirmed, his resident registration certificate, and Nonindicted 1 was able to be a minor (Evidence Record 173, 193, and 361 pages); and (b) other women who were in the sidewalk operated by the Defendant were 13 years old (Evidence Record 174 pages); and (c) it was determined that Nonindicted 1 was a minor on the external side through his appearance and behavior as he was merely 13 years old (Evidence Record 174 pages); and (b) the Defendant was aware that Nonindicted 1 was a minor.

3. Conclusion

All Defendant and defense counsel’s arguments are not accepted (in relation to the frequency of commercial sex acts, ① Nonindicted Party 1 stated six times the frequency of commercial sex acts when being investigated by the police for the first time at the time when memory is the most born and there is a low room for false intervention; ② the frequency of commercial sex acts was stated 12 times thereafter; ③ the number of commercial sex acts was stated as 12 times; ③ the initial statement is deemed to be the highest credibility when considering the time needed between commercial sex acts and places, the age of Nonindicted Party 1, etc.

1. Scope of punishment: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of three years and six months to twenty-five years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Basic crime: Crimes of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

[Determination of Punishment] Provision of a place where a person purchases sex for business purposes, such as brokerage of sex trafficking for children or juveniles under 19 years of age, and provision of brokerage information in the information and communications network (Type 3)

【Special Determination of Punishment】

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months to 8 years (Basic Area)

(b) Concurrent crimes: Violation of the Employment Security Act and the Juvenile Protection Act;

The sentencing criteria for each of the above crimes are not set.

(c) The scope of final sentence according to the standards for handling multiple crimes;

Since the crimes on which the sentencing guidelines have been set and those on which the sentencing guidelines have not been set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the sentencing guidelines should be observed only for not less than four years and six months, which are the lowest limit of the punishment for offenses of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (re

3. Determination of sentence: Five years of imprisonment;

Each of the crimes of this case is the business of arranging juveniles to be sexually subject, and the nature of the crime is heavy. The Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime. The Defendant did not show an attitude against the denial of some of the crimes.

However, the period during which the arrangement of commercial sex acts is performed is relatively short, and the profits therefrom does not seem to be much high. In addition, the defendant's age, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime are committed shall be comprehensively considered, and the punishment shall be determined as ordered by the text.

Where a conviction becomes final and conclusive on a crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, a defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and shall submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act.

The personal information registration period of a defendant is 20 years in accordance with Article 45(1)2 and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes. In full view of the crime which causes the registration of personal information and the other crime that causes the registration of personal information, the nature of the crime and the severity of the crime, etc., the personal information registration period should not be determined more than the period according to Article 45(4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, since it is deemed unnecessary to determine the registration period of personal information more than the period according to the sentence.

Judges Supplementary (Presiding Judge)