logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.6.9.선고 2016고단351 판결
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이·용촬영),명예훼손(일부공소취소)
Cases

2016 Highest351 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras, etc.)

Gamgraphing) Defamation (Partial Revocation of Public Prosecution)

Defendant

PowerA (84 years, South Korea), free of office

Residence

Reference domicile

Prosecutor

Park Jong-sung (Court Prosecution) (Court of Justice) and Kim Jong-sung (Court of Justice)

Defense Counsel

Attorney Yu Young-jin

Imposition of Judgment

June 9, 2016

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault therapy for 80 hours.

Reasons

Criminal facts

1. Crimes against the victim Kim ○-○;

(a) Violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras and photographing);

From the end of July 2014 to August 8, 2014, the Defendant took photographs of the victims against the victim's will by using the photographic function of the Defendant's cell phone to the victim Kim Jong-○ (V, 21 years old) who was divingd from the defendant's house in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, 000.

Accordingly, the Defendant took photographs of another person’s body, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame, against his will, using a mechanical device with a camera function as above.

(b) Defamation;

The Defendant, at the 00 dental hospital contact room located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, 2014, displayed the victim’s b body photographs taken in the above 1.A., on the part of the Defendant, at the 00 dental hospital contact room where the Defendant was working, for example, damaged the victim’s name by openly pointing out the fact that the victim had sexual intercourse with the victim.

2. Crimes against victim Lee ○-○;

(a) Violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras and photographing);

(1) On November 14, 2014, the Defendant taken pictures of the victim’s body pictures and sexually related video images against the victim’s will using the victim’s mobile phone photographing functioned in the victim’s cell phone shooting range located in Daegu-dong-gu 000-dong-gu, 000.

(2) On December 17, 2014, the Defendant taken pictures of the victim’s body pictures and sexually related video images against the victim’s will using the recording function of the mobile phone owned by the Defendant in the same manner at the same place as Paragraph (1).

(3) On February 2, 2015, the Defendant, at the home of the Defendant, such as the above 1. A, taken pictures of the victim’s bridge and sexually related dynamic images against the victim’s will by using the same method as the photographic function of the Defendant’s boomer.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, screened another person’s body, which could cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a mechanical device with a camera function three times in total, against his will.

(b) Defamation;

Defendant’s driving in BMW car No. 0000 of Defendant’s driving, which was parked in a factory in the vicinity of 000 parks located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, on March 2015, the Defendant: (a) stated that the Defendant had a sexual relationship with the victim; and (b) stated that the Defendant had a sexual relationship with the victim.

In other words, the above 2. A, as shown in the above 2. A, shows the video images recorded with the victim, thereby impairing the honor of the victim by openly pointing out facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in court;

1. Legal statement of the witnessB;

1. Each police statement on Kim○-○, Lee ○-○, and Yellow 00

[In relation to the crime under paragraph (1) of the judgment, the defendant recognized the fact that a male-child group had sexual intercourse with the victim who was under influence of alcohol, but did not have taken the victim's b body pictures. However, this part of the facts charged is found guilty in light of the following: (a) the statement by this B, which the defendant shown the above pictures, is very specific and detailed; (b) the statement by this B based on the contents that the defendant shown from the defendant was replaced with the facts regarding the remaining criminal facts, etc.; and (c) the statement by this part only made a false statement regarding this part. It is difficult to see that this part of the facts charged is guilty.

In addition, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant did not have a public performance by expressing the above facts only to the Lee B, who was friendly at the time of the crime of defamation. However, in light of the relationship between the Defendant and LeeB at the time, the relationship between the Defendant and LeeB, other than his personal conscience, there was no objective reason that LeeB should particularly keep the above facts confidential, and the Defendant did not make such request, the possibility of its dissemination is recognized in light of the fact that LeeB could make the above facts known to others for a long time, and that the fact was actually spread by reporting to the president of 00 dental hospital, and a part of the fact was disseminated to the president of 00 dental hospital. This part of the assertion cannot

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Article 14(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a point of view in photographing cameras, etc.), the Criminal Act

Article 307(1)(Defamation) and Selection of Imprisonment, respectively,

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Order to complete a program;

Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

Reasons for sentencing

The Defendant took and recorded sexual intercourses with various women, including victims, and made a extreme sexual humiliation to the victims by disclosing them to a person closely related to the victims' workplace compensation. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the part where sexual intercourses were released by the victim's agreement with the victim, but it can be considered in sentencing because it shows the defendant's tendency, crime before and after the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime. In particular, the crime of paragraph (1) of the instant decision seems to have been repeated against several victims. To this end, it is inevitable for the Defendant to properly prosecute or inform the Defendant of the facts corresponding to the above crime in accordance with the victim's anonymous act, such as purchasing fingers with the video recording function, etc. The several methods are very active, such as the process and contents of the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the crime, the circumstances before and after the crime, the Defendant's aforementioned act, and the above facts that correspond to the victim's sexual intercourses to the above investigation agency.

However, in full view of the following circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.

Registration of Personal Information

If a conviction of a defendant against a sexual crime subject to registration becomes final and conclusive, the defendant is the winner of personal information registered in accordance with Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and is obligated to submit personal information to related agencies pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act.

Disclosure Order or Exemption from Notice Order

In light of the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of repeating a crime, health condition, the type, motive, process, seriousness of a crime, result, and gravity of an order of disclosure or notification, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s injury, the prevention and effect of a sexual crime subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, the effect of protecting the victimized person, etc., the Defendant shall not be ordered to disclose or notify personal information. Thus, an order of disclosure or notification shall not be issued to the Defendant.

Judges

Judges Lee Jong-sung

arrow