beta
Text
1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 5,000,000 won;
2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant stated in the bill of indictment on March 16, 2013 as " March 11, 2013" but it is obvious that it is a clerical error.
Around 11:47, at the bus stops in front of the commercial building located in the area of the members of the Ansan-si, the victim C (here, 17 years of age) who was aboard the city bus was followed, and the victim was her her k's k't.
As a result, the defendant committed an indecent act against a child or juvenile victim by force.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement made by C by a witness in the third protocol of trial;
2. Each police statement concerning C;
3. Application of each statute of photograph;
1. Article 7 (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Article 298 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;
2. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (wholly amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014).
3. Article 457-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act exempted from order to complete a program (where a person who commits a sex offense against a child or juvenile is convicted, an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program shall be imposed pursuant to Article 13(1) and (2) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse. However, in the instant case, the Defendant’s order issued only a fine of five million won without issuing a separate order to complete a program was implemented in the trial procedure by filing an application for a formal trial. As such, the order to complete a program more unfavorable than the above summary order may not be additionally imposed upon the Defendant pursuant to the principle prohibiting disadvantageous change under Article 457-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Supreme Court Decision 2012Do8736 Decided September 27, 2012)
4. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under the proviso to Article 38(1) and the proviso to Article 38-2(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, exempted from disclosure
1. The gist of the allegation is that the Defendant was on board the city bus, such as the victim, but the victim was on board.