beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine for negligence in KRW 7,000,000 (live million).
When the defendant does not pay a fine, 100.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
At around 16:30 on December 3, 2013, the Defendant discovered the victim E (the age of 14) (the Defendant) who was seated in the stairs tree C located in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, and was living together with a cell phone.
피고인은 피해자의 옆에 앉아 갑자기 피해자의 허벅지를 쓰다듬어 만지고, 피해자에게 "만지면 안되냐, 한번만 만져보자, 따먹고 싶다, 너는 가슴 안떨리냐, 손 좀 줘봐라, 뽀뽀하고 싶다.“라고 말하면서 재차 피해자의 허벅지를 쓰다듬어 만지고, 자리에서 일어나 피해자의 목에 입을 맞추어 청소년인 피해자를 강제로 추행하였다.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement of the defendant in the first protocol of trial;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;
1. Article 7 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and Article 298 of the Criminal Act, which select the relevant criminal facts and punishment;
1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;
1. The main sentence of Article 21 (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;
1. The accused shall not have any record of being punished for committing any sexual crime, in violation of the proviso to Article 49 (1) or the proviso to Article 50 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;
In addition, the defendant has a certain occupation and lives together with his family members, and the social relationship is clear.
Above all, the Defendant reflects the instant crime in depth, and again does not commit such a crime.
Comprehensively taking account of these circumstances, there are special circumstances in which the personal information of the defendant should not be disclosed or notified in this case, as it seems that the interests and prevention effects expected by the disclosure or notification order are too much disadvantageous to the defendant.
Therefore, it is true.