2019No1770 Act on the Prohibition of Quasi-rape, Improper Solicitation and Receipt of Money and Valuables

violation of applicable rate

A

Defendant

Shin Young-young (prosecutions) and Kim Sung-hwan (public trial)

Law Firm Lee Hun-han

Attorney Kim Tae-won, and Attorney Kim Gi-jin

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2018Gohap113 Decided July 12, 2019

February 7, 2020

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

1) The Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, did not intend to have sexual intercourse with the victim in G (hereinafter referred to as “instant main point”).

2) Even if the Defendant intended to have sexual intercourse with the victim, it cannot be deemed that the victim was in an insane condition at the time when the Defendant intended to have sexual intercourse with the victim.

3) Even if the Defendant intended to have sexual intercourse with the victim in a state of mental disorder, the victim considered and re-divated the Defendant’s horses, i.e., “finite, I am in a finite,” while resisting the Defendant, and thereafter, there was no circumstance that the Defendant would hinder the Defendant from taking full charge of the crime, and thus, does not constitute an attempted

B. Unreasonable sentencing

Punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, 40 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, additional collection

5,022,00 won is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

1) As to whether the Defendant intended to engage in sexual intercourse at the principal point of the instant case

The Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below, and the court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of detailed reasons under the title “the crime of attempted quasi-rape or the crime of attempted rape” (as to the crime of attempted quasi-rape or the crime of attempted rape). Considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, the court below can sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant tried to have sexual intercourse with the victim’s panty under the influence of alcohol. The court below’s aforementioned purport can be sufficiently recognized.

The judgment is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misapprehending the legal principles. This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

A) The relationship between the Defendant and the victim and the type of business of the main point in the instant case

(1) Around 2013, the Defendant first appeared to have been the victim at the instant main point, but around September 2017, the Defendant was not well aware of the victim, such as being introduced from Q, the president of the instant main point, etc. Around September 2017. When the Defendant visited the main point of the instant case, the Defendant promised through B, an employee who is not the victim, who was not the victim. When the Defendant visited the main point of the instant case, he dice with I, and he dice with I. The Defendant stated in the court of the lower court that “A victim was not well aware of the Defendant.” Q was “I dice only once the main point of the instant case was not known.” At the court of the lower court, the Defendant stated that “A victim was never aware of the number of the main points of the instant case and was temporarily unlocked,” and “B did not have been aware of the number of the main points of the instant case.”

(2) The instant drinking point was sold in alcohol and operated in the form of a horse with female employees present in the drinking room with customers. There was no excessive sprink that goes beyond a minor physical contact even in the drinking place where the instant case occurred. At the time, the employee I stated in the court below that “Skin on the day of the instant case was the degree to be sprinked and sponsed at the time when the Defendant sprinked and sprinked on his hand.” The J also stated in the court below that “the Defendant was aground before the Defendant was put in the sprink on his chest, but the instant day of the instant case did not memory as to whether there was that day.” The Defendant stated that the Defendant’s spuck to the employees’ s sprink was not written.”

(1) Around 02:00 on December 23, 2017, the Defendant talked to the rest of the people other than the victim, who were in drinking place at the time. At that time, B, H, and Russian employees (hereinafter “K”), who were in drinking place, left the main point of this case after having left only the Defendant and the victim. At the court of the lower court, K stated that “K was the same as that of the Defendant at the time of the trial of the lower court, and I think it would be desirable for the witness to leave the place because I think that I would go against the Defendant because I would come to go to know that I would go to go to the HP employees.” At the investigative agency, I stated that “I would go to go to the end of his house” on the 13th day of 17th day of 2017.

(2) 피고인은 술에 취한 사람들을 정리하기 위해서 위와 같이 집에 가라고 이야기 하였다고 주장하나, 당시 피해자도 다른 사람들과 마찬가지로 만취한 상태였다. K는 원심 법정에서 "증인이 이 사건 주점을 떠날 당시 피해자가 많이 취해있었다."라고 진술하였고, K가 2017. 12. 23. 08:59경 피해자에게 보낸 카카오톡 메시지에도 "메너저님 안녕하세요 어제 집에 잘 도착했어요? 너무 걱정했어요 ㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠ"라고 기재되어 있다.

(3) The Defendant also stated at an investigative agency that “Isday was well-known with the victim at least one hour prior to the new wall, and continued to be same as the victim. Of course, I thought that I did not have any reaction with the victim, and that I would like to see that I would like to do so. I did not think of this long. I would not think that I would like to see that I would like to 10 to 20 minutes, and that I would like to see a hotel or a hotel.” (4) In full view of these circumstances, the Defendant considered the sex relationship with the victim, sent all other people to the house, and sent it to the main point of this case to the victim.”

C) The details and circumstances of the victim’s statement

(1) Particulars of the statement on damage

(A) On December 23, 2017, around 05:00 on December 23, 2017, the victim did not talk about the facts of damage at the time of the first discovery to male-friendly P P, and after several times thereafter, the victim stated that P and Q attempted to rape the victim (P stated in the court below that the victim expressed the facts of damage at the main point of the instant case, but in light of the victim, Q’s respective statements, and the statement at the investigative agency’s investigation agency, the above statement by P appears to have been detected).

(B) At around 05:00 on December 23, 2017, when the victim was under the influence of alcohol due to an excessive drinking, the victim was forced by male-child P on the part of December 23, 2017, which was 2 to 3 hours in mind. At the time, the victim seems to have been unable to recover the complete consciousness or memory with the drinking flag, and it is determined that the victim recovered the consciousness or memory gradually in the course of waiting to the airport by returning to the house and moving to the shower and moving to the airport.

(다) 피해자는 원심 법정에서 "P이 깨웠을 때는 술에 취해 있어서 이런저런 분별을 할 수 있는 상태가 아니었다. 술에 취해 있을 때는 신고해야겠다는 생각을 못 했고, 술이 깨고 나서 그런 생각을 했다. 술이 완전히 깬 것은 공항에 도착한 이후 오후쯤이었다."라고 진술하였고, Q도 원심 법정에서 "증인이 12. 23. 피해자와 여러 차례 통화를 하였는데, 피해자가 초기에는 약간 정신이 없고 경황이 없는 듯한 목소리였고 대답을 잘 못했다. 나중에 통화했을 때는 '어렴풋이 기억나는 것 같다', '잘 기억은 안 나는데 덮친 것 같다', '위에 올라타 있는 것을 자기가 발로 차고 막 밀어낸 것 같다', '이 분 사장님 손님인데... 이런 생각을 하면서 발로 찬 기억이 난다'라고 이야기했다."라고 진술하였다. 피해자가 2017. 12. 23. 19:29경 Q에게 보낸 카카오톡 메시지에도 "최악의 일은 없었어도 그냥 못 넘어가요", "생각하면 할수록 어이 없어요", "술 깨니 점점 더 생각나요."라고 기재되어 있고, B도 수사기관 및 원심 법정에서 "이 사건 당일 오후 Q로부터 '피해자가 그러는데 피고인이 덮쳐서 자기가 발로 찼는데, 당했는지 안 당했는지 혼란스러워한다'는 이야기를 들었다."라고 진술하였다.

(D) In full view of these circumstances, the victim, who had been in a state of serious nivement, talks with P and Q about his memory that remains after being recovered in a state of nivement depending on the passage of time, and the circumstances leading up to the victim’s statement in the above damage seems to be very natural.

(2) Details of the statement of damage

(A) On December 23, 2017, the victim’s memory from around 02:00 to 05:00 on the same day he was found in male-gu P on the same day with the Defendant’s main points in the instant case, which had been left only the Defendant and the victim left. The Defendant’s body was faced with the victim’s body while going in his house, and the victim was broken, and the victim was faced with the victim’s body. The Defendant tried to get off the victim’s body and her panty, and her body was cut off the victim’s body and her panty, and the victim resisted the victim’s body and her body and frighted down. The Defendant 's 'I will not fright about the Defendant’s body, and the victim 's 's frighten' was bread with the victim’s resistance while being drunkd.

(B) At the time of the instant case, the victim’s memory remains in a marbly as seen above, but the victim consistently states the above contents of his memory from the investigative agency to the court below’s trial, and the contents of the victim’s memory are not specific and contradictory. The victim appears to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time. However, as to the threat of the victim’s body and the victim’s panty, the Defendant’s act of being aware and perfected against the victim’s body and the victim’s pantyty is very strong shock, and it is determined that it is sufficiently possible to memory even when the victim was under the influence of alcohol.

(C) The victim recognized the fact that he is unable to memory other than the contents of his memory as above, and it does not seem that his memory or exaggeration the fact of damage. If the victim had a mind to make a false statement, it seems that P was clearly stated the situation at the time of the crime of this case, such as whether the crime of this case was committed in a room or outside the room, whether the victim was a soften that it was used outside the room, or whether the crime of this case was committed in a softention used outside the room, or whether the crime of this case was committed in a softenion used outside the room, or whether the above two waves was attached.

(D) At the time, the Defendant stated that the Defendant tried to rape the victim (the fact that the Defendant exceeded and attempted to go off the victim’s panty) and did not deny the remainder of the victim’s statement. The Defendant, upon receiving the victim’s statement from an investigative agency based on the victim’s above statement, stated that “I wish to go out to the victim, but I want to go out, rather than to go out when I want to rape the victim,” and that “I want to go back to the victim when I want to go out of the phone,” and that “I will not come back to the victim and the hotel even if I want to go back to the phone, I begin to be admitted from the prosecution investigation by the police investigation that denied the fact that the Defendant called “I would not come to come to her her spanty.” (The Defendant began to be admitted from the prosecution investigation by the police investigation).

(E) The Defendant consistently stated that, if the Defendant tried to rape the victim, the victim would not sleep again on that job even if she saw her the Defendant’s words “I would not have her friend.” However, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, the victim stated that “I would have her frily friened and friened in the state of drinking so that I would not have her her frisome in the state of drinking, and would have her frisome in the absence of mind.” Considering that at the time, the victim’s statement was sufficiently understood and there was no element to doubt its credibility. As alleged by the Defendant, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant’s action, such as leaving her workplace, is in accord with the rule of law.

(바) 피고인은 피해자가 증인신문 과정에서 인정한 이 사건 당시 피고인과 피해자의 자세를 묘사한 그림(공판기록 제339쪽)에 비추어 보더라도 피고인이 피해자의 몸 위로 올라와 있는 상태에서 피해자가 피고인을 발로 차는 것은 물리적으로 불가능하다고 주장한다. 그러나 이 사건 당시 피고인과 피해자의 자세가 피고인이 제시하는 그림과 정확하게 일치하였는지도 분명하지 않을 뿐 아니라(오히려 피해자는 피고인이 피해자의 팬티를 벗기고 치마를 올리려고 할 때 발로 찼다는 것이므로, 피해자가 피고인을 발로 찰 때의 모습은 위 그림보다 피고인의 손 등 신체 부위가 피해자의 하반신 쪽으로 더 내려와 있어야 할 것으로 보인다), 당시 피고인과 피해자의 자세가 피고인과 피해자의 움직임에 따라 계속 변화하고 있었을 것이므로, 단순히 피해자가 증인신문 과정에서 위 그림을 당시의 모습으로 인정하였다고 하여 당시 피해자가 피해자의 팬티를 벗기고 피해자를 간음하려고 하는 피고인을 발로 차는 것이 불가능하였다.고 볼 수는 없다.

D) The circumstances after the instant crime was committed

(1) The reporting process of the instant case

(A) On January 3, 2018, the 11th day after the date of the instant crime, the victim reported the Defendant to the police on January 3, 2018. The delay of the victim’s report is due to the fact that the victim had already considered the fact of damage on December 23, 2018, the date of the instant crime, but it is determined that Q, the president of the main branch of the instant case, had re-written consideration.

(B) On December 23, 2017, the victim sent Q Q Q a Kakakao Stockholm message to Q, “I would like to do so even without having to do so,” “I would like to do so if I would like to do so,” “I would like to do so if I would like to do so,” and Q would like to read “I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think,” “I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to think I would like to report the Defendant on the day of the instant crime.” According to this, the victim seems to have reported the Defendant on the day of the instant crime.

(C) Meanwhile, the victim stated that Q had long-standing personal trust relationship beyond the relationship between Q and employees, and Q had been illegally conducted, and that Q was unable to operate the main points in this case due to the victim's report, and discussed the direction of the settlement of Q and this case. The victim stated in the court below that "the witness did not go beyond his match," but the president stated that "the witness was sent to the witness, and he did not think about how Q and Q were defective. The witness was sent to the witness. Because of the type of business or various reasons, it was the first day due to the president." P also stated that " Q was the same as that of a middle school, and Q was the husband from the middle school to the middle school, and it was proper to report it to Q as a public official, and that Q did not report it to the police." The victim did not think that Q's statement that "I will not report it to Q as a public official."

(라) 피해자는 고심 끝에 피해사실을 신고하기로 결심하고 2017. 12. 30. 이후 이 사건 주점 출근을 중단하였고, Q에게도 이를 알렸다. 피해자가 2017. 12. 31. Q에게 보낸 카카오톡 메시지에는 "저도 그 일 후로 계속 사장님이랑 가게 때문에 고민했는데.. 돈으로 끝낼 수가 없어요.. 다음 주부터 진행하려구요.. 죄송해요..ㅠ"라고 기재되어 있다.

(E) The procedure for reporting specific damage was examined by P. At the time, the victim and P appears to have been aware that even if the defendant reported the damage as a senior public official, the victim and P would not be properly punished. It is natural that the victim would proceed with the police reporting procedure by resorting to male-child job offering P at the time, and that male-child job offering P actively helps the victim report while working in the instant crime.

(2) The Defendant’s repetitive crime of death and injury compensation for Q, etc. on Defendant’s side

(A) After the instant crime, on December 27, 2017, B found the main points of this case, and stated that “I see why I would have been erroneous for the victim. I must do so. I do not know that I would like to see why I would have been wrong for the victim.” From B, the Defendant tried to find the main points of this case on December 28, 2017, but the victim would not have been able to see, but the Defendant did not know that I would not have been able to see that I would have been able to see that I would not know that I would like to see that I would like to see that I would like to see that I would have been kne and that I would not have been able to know that I would like to see that I would like to see that I would not have been able to know that I would like to see that I would have been rape by the Defendant at the time of the instant crime.”

(C) On January 3, 2018, B, on behalf of the Defendant, made efforts to smoothly resolve the instant case, sent text messages to the victim on the part of the Defendant, saying, “I have made it difficult for the victim to request a telephone call only once,” and “I have made it erroneous for the victim to do so. I have received the text messages “I have been well known that I would have been infinitely low conditions.”

(D) The Defendant transferred KRW 70 million to Q through B on January 3, 2018. The Defendant asserts that Q would be liable for damages to Q’s failure to operate the instant main point any more when Q filed the instant report. However, according to the facts alleged in this case, the Defendant’s assertion that Q would have given Q a total of KRW 70 million to compensate the damages to Q. However, according to the facts alleged in this case, the Defendant attempted to drink in a good atmosphere with the victim, who is a staff member of Q, and attempted to go to go to the hotel as the Defendant agreed on a sex relationship and tried to go to go to the hotel. However, the Defendant was not liable for damages to Q’s report due to the victim’s failure to keep the victim’s loss, and thus, the Defendant did not have any responsibility for compensating for damages to Q at the time of making the report.

(E) Even if considering the fact that the Defendant was in a situation where he was at the time when he was a public official, such as the repeated crime of the Defendant’s repeated death, Defendant’s attitude and Q, the Defendant’s compensation for damages, etc., is a series of conduct that could not be understood formally on the premise that the Defendant did not commit the instant crime, on the premise that he did not commit it.

(3) Other circumstances

(A) The Defendant asserts that the victim’s actions are different from the general behaviors seen as the victim of rape, such as not having been placed in the U.S. and the hospital immediately after the instant crime, rather having been traveling P and Japan, and going to work again at the main points of the instant case, which is the place of crime, after travelling.

(B) However, on the day of the instant crime, the victim did not think that the Defendant attempted to rape and did not actually engage in rape. Therefore, it seems that it was difficult to actively collect evidence to prove that sexual intercourse had occurred due to the fact that the victim was sexual intercourse between the father and the hospital.

(C) The victim's travel was made in advance a prior promise to take-off the aircraft scheduled to take-off from 11:05 A.M. on the day of the crime of this case, it seems that there was no time to take serious consideration of whether to report the crime of this case to the police at the time, whether to leave the school as scheduled, and whether to leave the school as scheduled. Furthermore, the victim appears to have not been fully informed of the drinking until the departure from the airport, and it appears that the situation at the time of the crime of this case started gradually, waiting for the postponed flight after arrival at the airport, and the late arrival of the airport, and that the situation at the time of the crime of this case started gradually clearly. At that time, the victim and P thought that the Defendant did not have any sex relation, and Qua discussed together with the instant case was actively soliciting the victim to leave the airport as scheduled to take-over the Japanese travel.

(D) Not only was the victim planned to take over the instant main points from Q, but also when the victim was in charge of the operation of the instant main points as the manager, the victim was unable to operate the instant main points when he ceases to work. Therefore, it seems not easy for the victim to make a decision to discontinue the instant main points. Accordingly, the victim appeared to work again at the instant main points after the Japanese travel, but the victim decided to terminate the instant main points only 3 days, notwithstanding the above circumstances.

(E) In light of such circumstances, the act of the victim pointing out by the Defendant does not seem to be an exceptional case as a victim of rape.

E) The victim’s hole resulting from the victim’s body is merely presumed to have been caused by the instant crime and does not accurately know what process the hole occurred. The prosecutor did not include the part of the injury while instituting the instant prosecution.

The result of the appraisal commission of the AI college law school room in the court of the trial is not against the statement of the victim who inferred that the body of the victim was caused by the instant crime.

F) Whether there was the motive for the victim to make a false statement

(1) The Defendant asserts the possibility that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol by referring to the fact that the Defendant was forced to panty and the brupted by the panty, and that the male-friendly P was not able to clarify the sex of the Defendant. However, on the day of the instant case, P had already judged that the victim was not in a sexual relationship with another person after discovering the victim at the main point of the instant new wall on the day of the instant case and examining surrounding circumstances, but the victim had already judged that the victim did not have a sexual relationship with the other person. However, the victim did not appear to have been the Defendant in order to clarify the above situation. If the victim did not have the Defendant for the purpose of harming P, it would be the most favorable that the victim forced panty by the Defendant, but it would be subject to a larger criticism if the victim asserts that he did not proceed to a sexual relationship (if he asserts that he did not have a sexual relationship, it would rather be subject to a larger criticism).

However, even though the victim did not reach the gender relationship from the investigative agency to the court of the court below until her mind, it appears that she continues to be aware of whether she did not reach the gender relationship after her mind. This is determined to be due to the fact that she has expressed her memory as it is.

(2) The victim did not obtain economic benefits through the instant report, and rather, seems to have reached the instant report. The victim did not request the Defendant to reach an agreement after the instant report. The victim wanted to take over the instant main points from Q in the course of investigation and trial by clarifying that there was no intent to reach an agreement. At the time of the instant case, the victim was in the state of having agreed to take over the main points from Q, and the Defendant and B occupied a considerable portion of the sales of the instant main points. In such a situation, the victim filed the instant report and led to the closure of the instant main points, thereby resulting in considerable economic loss not only to the victim but also to Q with special relationship with the victim.

G) Statement of the defendant

(1) The panty of the victim

The Defendant stated at an investigative agency that “B, H, and K go home, and that “B, while drinking with the victim, her panty military system” was the victim, the Defendant left off the victim’s pantyty because the victim was her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her. He she she she

However, as seen earlier, when the victim leaves the drinking place B, H, and K, the victim was in a state that he had already met, and the main point of this case is not a type of business that divides a serious Skin. Furthermore, the Defendant and the victim did not have a close-friendly relationship, and thus, at the time, the Defendant and the victim did not have a situation that can divide the Akin’s own sins.

As seen earlier, all people who were in the drinking place at the time stated that they did not do so. Employees of the drinking place at the time stated that they did not do so. On the day of the instant case, the victims suffered knee from knee on the nitron on the part of which they did not so, and only a minor sknee, such as aground, etc. while dancing. Employees of the drinking point at the time of the instant case return to the house first under the influence of alcohol, and seems to have been the drinking place in a free atmosphere (the Defendant first at the investigative agency, “the victim was skneed and kneed by the victim’s chest before her drinking,” and the Defendant stated that “the victim was sknee and kneeed from 00:0 to 10:0,000,000 other people made a statement that they did not have any knee on the drinking place at that time.”

In addition, B stated in the court of the court below that "When the defendant was moving back to H and K and returned to the main points of this case, the defendant was seated at the right seeing of the witness, and the victim was present at the defendant." However, as the defendant asserts, if the defendant was found to go out of the victim's panty, the defendant and the victim did not sit as above when he returned to the court of the court below."

In full view of these circumstances, the Defendant’s statements and arguments are difficult to believe.

(b)for hotel reservation;

The defendant, at the time of the instant case, agreed with the victim's sex relationship and promised to make a hotel near the instant main point, but the defendant argued that he was unable to hold a hotel room because the victim's status was not good when he promised to make a hotel and returned to the hotel.

However, there is no objective evidence supporting the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant promised to the hotel room at the time of the instant case. Even if the Defendant assumed that the Defendant promised to the hotel room at the time of the instant case, at the time, the victim would not have been able to take the victim’s hotel room in the state of drinking drinking, and make quasi-rape. As such, the fact that the hotel room was promised cannot be deemed to mean a sex agreement between the Defendant and the victim. Rather, if there was an agreement between the Defendant and the victim at the time of the instant case, the Defendant would not first have promised to the hotel room, but rather have led the victim to the hotel room by leaving the main point of the instant case.

2) As to whether the victim was in a habitual condition.

In the lower court, the Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the assertion of Defendant A and his defense counsel (the crime of attempted quasi-rape or the crime of attempted rape) on the following grounds: (a) recognized by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the trial court; (b) should be deemed to have started the commission of the instant crime when the Defendant began physical contact to have sexual intercourse with the victim who lost awareness by drinking; and (c) the victim recovered some awareness due to physical contact and resisted it at the time of the commencement of the instant crime; and (d) the victim clearly appears to have been in a state of mental disorder at the time of the instant crime. The lower court’s judgment to that purport is just and there was no error by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3) In regard to whether or not a criminal defendant has discontinued a crime on the grounds of the circumstances obstructing the completion of the crime, the term “an attempted crime” means the commencement of an act of commission of a crime and the suspension of an act of commission of a crime according to his/her own free will prior to completion of the crime, and in distinguishing between an attempted crime and an attempted crime and an attempted crime, it should be determined depending on whether or not an attempted crime is committed by a person who committed such a crime, and in particular, it does not constitute an attempted crime due to an obstacle to the general social norms even during the voluntary discontinuance by such person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 85Do2002, Nov. 12, 1985).

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court of first instance, it is recognized that the defendant's defect that the defendant tried to have sexual intercourse with the victim regardless of whether he had sexual intercourse with the defendant, and that P continued to have a telephone with the victim's cell phone and the main store of this case at that time, and that the defendant also thought that "the victim had a telephone from the victim who had a relationship with the victim's 00 scam," and that the defendant had a mind that "the victim had a relation with the victim's scam, and that the scam was found to have a victim, and that the scam has given up to have a hotel at that time."

Comprehensively taking account of these circumstances, the suspension of the Defendant’s crime by the victim’s resistance, etc., and thus, the instant crime does not constitute an attempted crime. The circumstance that the Defendant again got out of the victim after the Defendant waived the crime is merely an circumstance after the completion of the instant crime, and thus does not interfere with the acknowledgement of the attempted crime. The Defendant’s assertion on this part is without merit.

B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing

The court below determined a punishment against the Defendant in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant, a public official, received money and valuables in excess of one million won, etc. from the main point of this case three times from the main point of this case; (b) the Defendant attempted to have sexual intercourse with the victim at the center of this case, who was under the influence of alcohol, and attempted to have sexual intercourse; (c) the victim seems to have suffered considerable mental pain and sexual humiliation due to the crime of this case; and (d) the Defendant was unable to receive a letter or recover from the victim; (b) the Defendant was the first offender; and (b) the Defendant was led to the confession and reflect on the violation of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, among the crimes of this case, the Defendant returned part of the money and valuables delivered to B; (d) the duty relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant or the Defendant did not have been denied; and (e) the Defendant’s sexual assault crime of this case was committed in favor of the Defendant.

The lower court’s sentencing seems to have been appropriately determined by fully taking into account the aforementioned various circumstances, and there is no change in special circumstances that may be assessed differently from the sentencing conditions of the lower court up to the trial. The Defendant is unable to completely recover the victim’s damage up to the trial. In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, criminal records, criminal records, the circumstances, and result of the crime, etc., the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable to the extent that it exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Freeboard of the presiding judge and judge

Judges Cho Jin-jin

Judge associates