beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
No one shall operate facilities harmful to juveniles in a school environment sanitation and cleanup zone.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, from July 2, 2015 to September 9, 2016, installed 9 partitions and three shower facilities with the trade name of “E” on the first floor of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building, a school environment sanitation cleanup zone, from Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, and operated a rest room, which is a juvenile harmful facility.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;
1. Business registration certificate;
1. E on-site photographs;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning information about school environment sanitation and cleanup zones;
1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 19(2) and 6(1) of the former School Health Act, the option of punishment, and Article 6(1) (Amended by Act No. 13946, Feb. 3, 2016)
A. According to Article 2 of the Addenda of 13946 of the above Act, when applying penal provisions to the acts before the enforcement of the above Act, the previous provisions shall apply and the decision of imprisonment shall be made.
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;
1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act: The Defendant, in the year 2015, had been sentenced to a fine for the same kind of crime on two occasions, but has failed to do so and again committed the instant crime. The Defendant, at the place of the instant crime, has been punished for the act of arranging sexual traffic and has been subject to suspended execution.
The favorable circumstances: The defendant is against the defendant, recognizing the crime of this case.
The defendant is not in danger of recurrence after closing his business.