A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant, as a relative of the victim C (16 years of age) and D (14 years of age), was divorced from the victim's father on October 2003, and had the victims leave the victim's father to leave the victim's father and rear the victims directly from 2012.

The defendant used the body of the victims from time to time by using the body of the victims, such as fingers or mongs, and the victims suffered fear of the defendant.

1. The Defendant, in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, committed an indecent act by force on three occasions against victims of kinship.

On 2012, the Defendant sent shower at the Defendant’s home located in the Gyeongbuk-gun, Gyeongbuk-gun, and caused the victims to enter the victim’s bath, and used that the victims were in a state of drinking and not resisting due to the Defendant’s daily assault, and caused the victims to be informed of panty, so that her panty off and her turt was frighted so as to stimulate the victims’ resistance by using showers.

B. On November 2014, the Defendant: (a) took advantage of the fact that the victims were not frighten and resisted by the Defendant’s daily assault as seen above; (b) had the victims get the victims to a panty panty in front of the bed; and (c) had the victims spanty spanty spanty spanty spanty spanty sty s

C. On February 2015, the Defendant: (a) took advantage of the fact that the victims were frightened by the Defendant’s daily assault as seen above, and caused the victims to have panty panty in front of the bed; and (b) took place before the bed and got into the bed, and (c) went to the victims’ sexual organ.

2. Around 03:00 on April 7, 2014, the Defendant proposed that the victims be aware of the fact at the above house, and the victims be aware of the fact that the Defendant violated the Child Welfare Act (Habitual child abuse).