Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On November 3, 2019, around 03:30 on November 3, 2019, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim D (here, 26 years of age) who was returning home on the alleyway in the vicinity of the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City C Park, called “welve to inform him of the telephone number needed for massage,” and by forcing the victim to commit an indecent act by his hand, by means of not humping the victim’s b

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Article 298 of the Criminal Act and Article 298 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

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

1. Where a conviction on a sex crime subject to registration becomes final and conclusive in the judgment, which is subject to the obligation to register and submit personal information under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant is subject to registration of personal information under Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and the defendant is obligated to submit personal information to the head of

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s age to be exempted from the disclosure and notification order and the employment restriction order; (b) the type and content of the crime; (c) the process of the crime; (d) the social interest expected by the disclosure order and the employment restriction order; and (e) the prevention effect of sexual crimes; and (e) the disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant; and (e) the disclosure and notification of the Defendant’s personal information or the issuance of an employment restriction order with children, juveniles-related institutions, etc.

On the issue, the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant stated the victim as stated in the facts charged, but they did not have a sense of the victim's satisfy.

The Court has duly adopted and investigated the case.