2015Gohap561 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras, etc.)

(G) Intimidation, intimidation, assault, bodily injury, rape;

A

Kim Jong-hwa (Court of Prosecution) and Lee Jong-young (Court of Justice)

Law Firm (LLC) B

Attorney C, D

May 20, 2016

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant shall be ordered to take a lecture for sexual assault treatment for 40 hours.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (melting Kameras, etc.) on August 28, 2014, injury, and rape shall be acquitted.

Criminal History Office

The Defendant, as a U.S. legal practitioner, was a U.S. legal practitioner E (here, 38 years of age) and from July 2013, 2013, the Defendant came to know that there was two women, such as F and G, who had come to their relationship with the Defendant at the same time in addition to the victim on March 2014, and around that time, F, who had returned to the Defendant for 11 years, was married with the Defendant’s 6-7 women, including female employees in the law office, who had been married to the Defendant at the same time.

1. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (carmers and photographs);

On April 2014, the Defendant took pictures of dynamics, which manipulating the Defendant’s mobile phone camera function and have sexual intercourse with the victim at the victim’s house of Jongno-gu Seoul International OOdong OOA, and which had sexual intercourse with the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant taken the body of the victim who could cause a sense of sexual shame by using the camera function against the victim's will.

2. Intimidation;

A. A. On April 7, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 2014, the Defendant made and distributed a letter, such as the statement on G and the victim, that “F had a video recording of a sexual intercourse with G and the victim; (b) had a video recording of a sexual intercourse with G; and (c) had a video recording of a sexual relationship with the victim to leave the workplace by borrowing the video image from the sexual relationship with G; and (d) had a video recording of a sexual relationship with the victim from a drinking victim who was fright and frighted, the Defendant received a request to delete the video recording.

At around 00:00 on May 19, 2014, the Defendant expressed the Defendant’s sexual relation photographs stored in the Defendant’s cell phone, and expressed the Defendant’s attitude that the victim seems to have circulated without hearing the Defendant’s speech. The Defendant threatened the victim. The Defendant expressed the Defendant’s sexual relation pictures, which were stored in the Defendant’s cell phone and the victim’s sexual relation pictures.

B. From around 00:49 to 03:40 on May 20, 2014, the Defendant made a telephone conversation with the victim and sent e-mail to the victim at the victim’s e-mail at the victim’s e-mail at the point of time at the time of the day. He must send one copy of the file to the victim, and what kind of width must be? The next step is as follows: “I am the same kind of 2 Dara City at the same time as the old day,” and “I am different from the old day in Korea. Korea also seems to have left the victim’s e-mail at the victim’s office without going through the victim’s movement in 2014.

C. At around 21:00 on May 21, 2014, the Defendant presented the victim’s e-mail accompanied by the victim’s b body photo to show the victim’s b body photo stored in the Defendant’s cell phone, and “E attorney......,” as a matter of viewing the victim’s b body photo as a performance in the presence of “L in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government K,” and expressed the victim’s e-mail, which is accompanied by the victim’s b body photo, as a matter of viewing the victim’s b body photo before the victim’s b body photo was threatened.

라. 피고인은 2014. 6. 2. 01:56경 불상의 장소에서 피해자와 전화통화를 하면서 피해자에게 "내일 6시 전까지 법률사무소를 그만둬라, 다 조용히 살자, 내가 원하는 거 다이야기했고, 그 다음에 너 다음에 이야기 들었으면 G는 대답도 다 들었으니까 그냥 다MOVE ON, 탤런트들도 씨발, 못 버티고 다 자살하는데, 진짜 일반인이 와, 싹 간다.

The victim expressed his attitude to spread the sexually related dynamic image of the defendant and the victim unless the victim ceases to resign from his/her law office. The victim threatened the victim with the sexually related dynamic image of the victim.

E. At around 23:00 on June 3, 2014, the Defendant called the victim on the ground that the victim would refuse the Defendant’s delivery before the Nlegal office located in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, to “one e-mail sent to the company”, and the victim drinking such fright shows two copies of the Defendant’s mobile phone device inside the Defendant and the victim’s sexual relation pictures while the victim was in an influorial drinking house located in the Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, along with the Defendant, and threatened the victim.

3. Violence;

A. At around 05:00 on June 4, 2014, the Defendant: (a) stated the Defendant’s car parked in front of the O’s “I”; (b) stated the Defendant’s sexual intercourse video in front of the Defendant and the victim’s sexual intercourse; (c) stated that the Defendant would spread the Defendant’s horse without hearing the Defendant’s horse; and (d) the victim was unable to take the victim’s hand on the ground that the victim’s boomed “hing off only, annoying,” and attempted to leave the said car, and the victim’s boomed the victim’s blick part and the victim’s clothes.

B. Around 23:00 on July 5, 2014, the Defendant assaulted the victim on the ground that the Defendant’s car parked in front of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “P”, and that the male and female movement fee of the victim, who was prone in the above car page, talked with the victim’s head, “if there is any reason for other male to talk with him/her, or her gress,” and assaulted the victim on the part of his/her hand, such as “if there is any reason for other male to talk with him/her, or if there is any gress,” and “if there is any reason for other male to talk with him/her.”

C. At around 03:00 on July 13, 2014, the Defendant: (a) laid a car parked in front of a “R” club in Qu Station near the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and checked the victim’s mobile phone base details; (b) discovered that the victim dialogueed with another male and S with the victim; (c) laid down the victim’s head and bucking down the victim’s head and bucking to get off the said car; and (d) prevented the victim from getting off the car.

The defendant continued to get out of the above car, when he gets out of the victim's clothes, boomed the victim's clothes, and assaulted the victim by drinking his hair, shoulder, etc. of the victim beyond the floor.

D. At around 02:00 on August 7, 2014, the Defendant asked the victim to submit a false statement in relation to the case in which F posted a statement that slanders the Defendant, such as the above facts, on the Internet, as to the case in which F defamations the Defendant. However, as the victim refused it, the Defendant used the victim’s head debt collection by hand and abused the victim’s arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of witness E and U in the first trial record;

1. Statement of witness V in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Statement of each of the police officers and the suspect examination protocol of the accused in each prosecutor's office (including each part of the investigation into the identity of the accused);

1. Each police officer and prosecutor's protocol regarding E;

1. Statement by the police of U;

1. Each statement and written complaint prepared by E;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. A report on investigation (related to requesting the analysis of digital evidence of seized goods), ten copies of the digital evidence analysis reply (Seoul Regional Police Agency), four copies of the digital evidence analysis replys (National Police Agency), the results of the appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation and Investigation, the results of the appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation and Investigation, the report on investigation (related to the analysis and response of seized goods), and the results of the analysis of digital evidence;

1. Two copies of the letters with the attorney-at-law of the defendant known through S around June 3, 2014, of the victim's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor

1. Samples from extraction data, CDs, evidence analysis results, and CDs;

1. USB of the recording file in which the defendant threatened a victim (Evidence No. 1253)

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Summary of the assertion

There is no fact that the defendant committed the same crime as the statement in the judgment against the victim. The victim made a false report or a false complaint to the police with the intent to have the defendant attach a separate notice to the defendant.

2. The judgment on the part of the crime under paragraph (1) of the judgment [the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (ameras and photographing

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it can be recognized that the Defendant had taken the sexual intercourse with the victim without the consent of the victim, as stated in the facts constituting the crime. This part of the allegation by the Defendant and the defense counsel is without merit.

A. On April 22, 2014, the Defendant stated that there was a video recording of a sexual intercourse with the victim.

① The victim stated consistently to the effect that, at any time, he/she was taken by an investigative agency and in this court, when and wherever he/she was taken. However, the victim made a statement to the effect that he/she was taken by the Defendant that he/she was recorded in a sex-related site on April 2014, and thus, he/she was taken. The victim stated to the effect that he/she was taken before the Defendant’s photographed. The Defendant did not directly show the images that he/she would erased on the page that he/she was taken.

② On April 22, 2014, the Defendant received a written message from the victim 1, 00:25, 2014, i.e., e., m m m m m m mad m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m.

③ At around 00:42 on the same day, the Defendant heard from the victim the phrase “on the one hand,” and asked “on the other, I am am ? I am ? I am ? I am ? I am ? I am ? I am ?? I am ? I am ? I am ? I am am ? I am am ? I am am ? I am am ? I am am ? I am am am? I am am ? I am am am? I am am? I am am? I am am ? I am am you am am? I am am

(이에 대하여 피고인은 피해자와의 성관계를 촬영한 동영상이 아니라 피해자와 피고인이 모텔 가운을 입고 함께 찍은 사진을 지워달라는 말이라고 주장한다. 그러나 피해자는 모텔 가운을 입고 찍은 사진에 대하여 "ㅋㅋ둘이 목욕탕 간 거 같애"라고 말하였을 뿐 지워달라는 요구를 하지 않았다. 또 피해자는 지워달라고 요구하는 대상에 대하여 '몰래카메라'라고 지칭하고 있다. 그 밖에 위 각 대화의 전후 맥락 등에 비추어 볼 때 피고인의 위 주장은 이유 없다)

B. In front of the victim’s house and L, the Defendant had revealed the victim’s photograph by capturing a sexually related video file.

① From September 12, 2014, before filing a complaint on this part of the facts constituting the crime, the victim made a statement to the same effect consistent with the investigation agency and this court. From September 12, 2014, the victim made a statement on May 19, 2014, on or around May 21, 2014, and June 3, 2014, “A photograph of a sexual intercourse with the victim taken by the victim” (including 62,63,65 pages). Furthermore, the victim’s statement on this part is natural in view of the following: (a) the victim was removed from the victim’s body after his/her sexual relationship with the victim; and (b) the victim’s photograph and photograph were removed from the victim’s body, and (c) the victim’s photograph and photograph were removed from the victim’s body, and (e) the victim was removed from the victim’s photograph and photograph, and (e) the victim was removed from the victim’s photograph and photograph were removed from the victim’s body.

At around 03:40 on May 20, 2014, the Defendant asked to see whether the victim does not display a photograph by cutting the sexually related video images with the victim before 'the victim does not appear', and the Defendant responded to the purport that 'the fact that the victim shown the image before 'the victim does not appear as the victim' (as the investigation record 356 pages), and on June 2, 2014, around 01:56, the Defendant did not actively deny it.

C. The Defendant continued to call that the victim would transmit the e-mail of the victim’s video files to the victim’s e-mail, or had shown an attitude to spread the video images.

피고인은 2014. 5. 20. 00:49경 전화통화에서는 피해자에게 '내일 3시쯤에 피해자의 회사 이메일로 동영상 파일의 클립(just one clip)를 보낼 것이니 내일까지 결정을 해라', '파일 클립을 F에게 보여줄 것이다. F가 보고 나서 너에게 전화할 것이니 그때 결정해라'는 취지로 피해자를 협박하였고(수사기록 610, 614면), 2014. 6. 2. 01:56경 전화 통화에서도 '실제로 그런 (동영상을 유포하는 등의) 일이 일어난다면(When it becomes real), 정말 무서울 것이다'라고 말하면서 피해자를 협박하였다 (수사기록 371, 372, 380).

D. The Defendant, in a short term, made his mobile phone more than twice and more early, was not in compliance with the police’s request for seizure.

On August 28, 2014, immediately after the victim took the police and found the defendant's house, the defendant first turned his own cell phone into the first early stage on August 28, 2014, and again turned into the first early stage on November 9, 2014, when the defendant was not present despite the request of an investigative agency for appearance (the investigation record 419, 420 pages).

In addition, on September 20, 2014, the defendant stated that the police officer who intends to seize the defendant's mobile phone based on the search and seizure warrant should leave his own mobile phone to the defense counsel. However, the defendant submitted his mobile phone that he concealed the fact that it was false.

3. Judgment on the part concerning the crime under paragraph (2) of the holding

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by this court, the following facts and circumstances can be acknowledged that the defendant took the same attitude as the victim’s sexual intercourse video as stated in the facts of the crime and threatened the victim. Accordingly, this part of the assertion by the defendant and the defense counsel is rejected.

① A victim made consistent statements from an investigative agency to this court to the same purport as stated in each of the facts constituting an offense, and each of the statements is consistent specifically and alternatively. In particular, as seen earlier, the victim made a statement on September 12, 2014 regarding each of the crimes of intimidation as of May 19, 2014 and June 3, 2014, prior to the filing of a complaint for each of the crimes of this case, the victim made a detailed statement on each of the crimes of intimidation as of September 12, 2014, prior to the filing of a complaint for each of the crimes of this case (the investigative record 62-65 pages), and on each of the crimes of intimidation as of May 21, 2014 and June 3, 2014 (the investigative record 62-

On May 20, 2014, between the Defendant and the victim, the contents of intimidation on criminal facts, around 00:49 on the same day, around 03:40 on the same day, and June 2, 201:56 on June 2, 2014, each telephone conversation (a investigative record of between 609-615, 342-382 pages).

③ 피고인은 2014. 6. 2. 23:45경 피해자에게 'I do not really have much timel letme know tomo'라는 문자메시지를 보내고, 계속하여 같은 날 23:49경 "pls let meknow by 6pm cuz it is holiday Wednesday'라는 문자메시지를 보냈는데(수사기록 331면), 그 즈음 이루어진 전화통화 내용을 더하여 보면 위 각 문자메시지의 내용은 피고인이 피해자에 대하여 협박 내용대로 다니던 직장을 그만두라고 독촉하는 것으로 보인다.

④ Otherwise, around May 21, 2014, Written messages (Investigation Records 476 pages), between the Defendant and the Victim (Investigation Records 476 pages), telephone conversations (Evidence No. 131) between the Victim and J on June 2, 2014, and text messages (Investigation Records 710-713 pages) between the Defendant and the Victim on May 2, 2014, the Defendant had the Victim deliver the content of his intimidation to the Victim through F.

4. Judgment on the part concerning the crime of Paragraph (3) of the holding / [Assault]

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the following facts and circumstances are recognized. ① The victim made a statement to the same effect as the facts constituting the crime in this part at investigation agency and this court, and each of them is consistent. ② The victim also made a photograph of 300 to 314, 744, 745 pages, and the photograph of the victim’s body were recorded at 40 to 98 USB before and after the victim’s oral statement (the victim’s oral statement 6th day of August 28, 2014) or 40 to 5th day after the victim’s oral statement (the victim’s oral statement 5th day of November 11, 2014). The victim’s oral statement was also recorded at 40 to 5th day after the victim’s oral statement and 5th day after the victim’s oral statement and 4th day after the victim’s oral statement (the victim’s oral statement 5th day of November 2014).

In full view of the above facts and circumstances, a victim’s statement that conforms to the facts constituting each of the crimes in this part may be trusted, and accordingly, the Defendant may be recognized as having abused the victim on the date and time of the crime in this part. The Defendant and the defense counsel do not accept this part of the allegation.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 14(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the occupation of photographing the use of a camera and others, the choice of imprisonment), Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of intimidation, the choice of imprisonment), Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of violence and the choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

The punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall be aggravated for concurrent crimes with the punishment provided for in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes with the largest penalty (aggravated increase in concurrent crimes

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (As stated in the reasons for sentencing below, taking into account the conditions of sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act)

1. Order to attend lectures;

Registration and submission of personal information under the main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

When a conviction of a crime specified in paragraph (1) of the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and he/she shall submit personal information to the competent agency

Disclosure and Notice Order, Article 47(1) and Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

Order needs to be prudent in that it may have a significant impact on the defendant. The crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amera, etc.) is not against many unspecified victims. There is no record of punishment prior to the crime committed by the defendant. It appears that the defendant has an effect to prevent the recidivism of the defendant to a certain extent by taking lectures in the registration of personal information and the taking lectures in the treatment of sexual assault. In light of all the above circumstances, in light of the aforementioned circumstances, disclosure and notification orders have significant adverse effects on the disadvantage and anticipated side effects that the defendant suffers, but it appears that the effects of the prevention of sexual crimes, etc. which can be achieved are relatively less than others, and thus, there is a special circumstance that the disclosure

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by law;

Imprisonment for not more than seven years and not more than six months;

2. Scope of recommendations;

(a) With respect to the offense of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, no sentencing criteria shall be set;

(b) Type 1 (General Intimidation), the basic area for intimidation (the first offence), two months to one year; and

(c) Type 1 (General Intimidation), Chapter 2-1 (General Intimidation).

(d) Type 1 (General Intimidation), the basic sphere of intimidation (Third Crime), two months to one year; and

(e) The scope of final sentence according to the standards for handling multiple crimes;

Imprisonment for not less than two months (limited to the lower limit of the sentencing range for the crimes whose sentencing criteria are set and those whose sentencing criteria are not set are concurrent) shall be recommended for not less than two months.

3. Determination of sentence;

The Defendant, as a result of sexual intercourse, taken the victim’s sexual intercourses with the victim, and assaulted the victim several times in such a way as to spread the sexual intercourse.

In light of the motive, background, means, contents, etc. of the crime in this case, each of the crimes in this case appears to have suffered considerable mental shock and strict punishment against the defendant.

However, considering the favorable circumstances that the defendant is the initial offender, other circumstances shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the age, environment, family relationship, etc. of the defendant, and the scope of the recommended sentence in the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court shall be determined as ordered.

The acquittal portion

1. The summary of the facts charged [the part concerning taking a photograph of, injury to, or rape in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Use of Cameras, 2014)]

On August 28, 2014, at around 03:30 on August 28, 2014, at the home of the victim E, Jongno-gu Seoul International OOdong No. 000, the Defendant confirmed the details of the victim's cell phone by misunderstanding that the victim had met another male, and asked the victim's criminal conduct. While the victim was suffering from another female's telephone with the Defendant's cell phone, the Defendant refused the Defendant's request and did not unfold the victim's cell phone secret code one time.

After that, the Defendant: (a) called “the victim who is frighter to evidence”; (b) laid the cell phone device above the table booming on the body of the victim; (c) laid off the victim’s body; (d) laid off the victim’s body; and (d) took off the victim’s body; and (e) took off the victim’s body; (d) took off the victim’s hair; and (e) took the victim’s hair back to the victim’s body; and (e) took the victim’s hair back to the victim’s body; and (e) took the victim’s hair back to the victim’s body; and (e) took the victim’s hair to the victim’s body; and (e) forced the victim’s resistance to the victim’s body. The Defendant continued to have sexual intercourse with the victim at the victim’s face, “to return the victim’s face to the head, to the best face, to the screen, to the screen, to the public, and to the public.”

As a result, when the victim's face is taken one-time by drinking, the defendant took a video image of the victim's body against the victim's will, which may cause sexual humiliation by having the victim engage in sexual intercourse once, and might cause sexual humiliation by using the camera function.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on evidence with probative value that makes a judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be determined with the benefit of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6110, Feb. 11, 2003).

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the defendant cannot believe the statement of E, which corresponds to the facts charged in this part, that the defendant inflicted bodily injury upon E on the day of the instant case, raped E, and taken the process of taking the video, and the other evidence submitted by the prosecutor is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(1) On the day of the instant case, YE did not confirm the Defendant’s straws, such as the E’s statement, in a clean state, without checking the bloodtains, etc., as shown in the CCTV images of the E’s residential area on the day of the instant case, hacks the Defendant’s drinking face once a week from “the Defendant hacks,” and shacks his source and floor in the upper part, with too much of the kacks. They are coming to the floor by leaving the door.

A. The Defendant was unable to take a part in the bed, and he was frightened on his body while taking a frighten image that the Defendant raped. When the frighted, he was frightened on his body, he entered his own body and frightened the cream that he was spited, and the fright that he was spited on his body, and the frightd on the fright that the fright was frighted on the part of the Defendant, and the frightd on the fright of the Defendant

According to the CCTV images of the E’s residential elevator and the present room’s CCTV on the day of the instant case, the Defendant visited the house of the E around 00:45 on August 28, 2014 by suffering white straws from white straws. On the same day, around 04:21 on the same day, it is confirmed that the Defendant fells the elevator and moves out of the E’s apartment. However, according to the above CCTV images, it appears that the Defendant’s bloods, such as the Defendant’s statement, were not confirmed after leaving the E’s house, and it appears clean.

(2) 성기 삽입 여부에 대한 E의 진술이 일관되지 않음E는 경찰 제2회 조사 당시에 '피고인의 성기를 E의 성기에 대고 삽입하려는 시늉은 했으나 삽입은 하지 않았다'고 진술하였고(수사기록 68면), 스스로 작성하여 2014. 11. 11.경 제출한 진술서에도 피고인이 자신을 강간하려 했으나 결국 강간은 하지 못하고 밖으로 나갔다고 기재하였다. 경찰 제3회 대질 조사 당시에도 "삽입은 하지 않았습니다"라고 진술하고, "피의자가 왜 삽입을 하지 않은 것 같나요"라는 경찰의 질문에 "모르겠어요, 좋게 생각하면 제가 너무 우니깐 안한 것 같고요, 동영상을 찍었으니 됐다고 생각한 것 같아요"라고 진술하였다(수사기록 400, 402면), 그러나 E는 검찰 제1회 대질신문 시 '아주 잠깐 삽입이 있었던 것 같다'는 취지로 진술한 이래(수사기록 538면) 이 법정에 이르기까지 피고인의 성기가 삽입되었다고 말하였다. 피고인의 성기가 삽입되었는지 여부는 강간 범행의 핵심적인 부분임에도, E의 이 부분 진술이 일관되지 않는다.

In this regard, E made a statement about this part at the time of the initial police investigation, but E made a statement that it was requested to delete this part of the record because he did not want to keep the records suffered from rape (in the face of 538). However, police officers V, who investigated E, made a statement that he did not memory that he did not delete from E in this court, and that he did not properly explain the reason that he did not inserted, and that he did not explain it. Considering that there was no motive to make a false statement to V, this part of V’s statement is credibility, and it is difficult to believe the E’s statement that is inconsistent with this.

(3) On August 28, 2014, immediately after the instant case, the police officers confirmed the Defendant’s mobile phone, but the police officers confirmed the Defendant’s mobile phone; however, on August 28, 2014, immediately after the instant case, U et al. received a report around 06:00, around 06:00 on August 28, 2014, and confirmed that there was a motion picture, etc. claimed by E in the Defendant’s cell phone gallon, thereby leaving the Defendant’s cell phone gallon with E and leaving the Defendant’s cell phone gallon (Investigation record 108, 224, 583 pages).

In addition, there was a talk that E, which had been at the time of entering the Defendant, would directly read to U’s mobile phone, that he would not go to the Defendant, and the police officer did not disclose the fact that E was able to go to the Defendant, and the Defendant was unaware of the fact that E was working with the police officer before the instant case, and the Defendant did not find the Defendant, and thus, he did not know that E was able to find the Defendant. U and X demanded the Defendant, who was getting off to the apartment under the above circumstances, to show the Defendant’s own mobile phone, and the Defendant laid down his own mobile phone on that spot. As seen earlier, considering the background leading up to confirming the Defendant’s mobile phone, it is doubtful whether or not the Defendant took the video on that day, such as the Defendant’s statement.

(4) The circumstances surrounding E’s report immediately after the instant case

In light of the defendant's mobile phone call details, around August 28, 2014, around 04:28, the defendant suffered from the phone call of E's apartment security guards from E's cell phone call, and the fact of 21 seconds' telephone call is recognized.

[No. 11-1] In relation to this, the defendant made a statement to the effect that the phone was cut off as follows: (a) the defendant called "I am at the house of E and return to the house of the defendant by getting a taxi; (b) I am at the house of E; and (c) I am you asked "I am at the end, I am at the end of the foot".

(Investigation Records 90, 582 pages).1. On the day of the instant case, the 112 Report Processing List stated that the reporter is a woman (Investigation Records 105 pages), and that E’s apartment security guards’ YY from August 28, 2014 to 04:30 to 05:30 on August 28, 2014, “E’s apartment security guards have to find and report, and the mobile phone is leased, and E was reported as a matter of male relation at the time.” (Investigation Records 106 pages).

Nevertheless, E made a statement at the investigative agency that "after the defendant left, the first floor and the apartment security guards were reported on behalf of the security guards, and that the security guards did not talk about the contents of the report in detail because the security guards were reported on behalf of the security guards." However, this court made a statement to the effect that "The security guards were not allowed to make a statement by borrowing the security guards' telephone by more concreteizing the statement, and then the security guards were reported to 112 and requested to report it to 112, and that the security guards were not allowed to make a statement to 112 before making the report (41,43 pages of the transcript of the examination of the witness), the contents of the above call, the contents of the list of 112 reported cases, and Y's statement are inconsistent with these circumstances. In light of these circumstances, E's statement has not been folded.

(5) On September 2, 2014, E submitted a medical certificate to the police that he/she was at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, he/she was at the emergency room of AA Hospital and was given treatment (the investigation record 41 to 46 pages). The doctor in charge was issued to E a medical certificate to the effect that he/she was at the face of an inner part requiring approximately two weeks of treatment. E submitted a photograph containing the chest part and the left part of the left part.

However, on August 24, 2014, 201, U.S. stated that “E was unable to be identified by the investigative agency,” and that “E was unable to be identified by it (the investigative record 225, 227 pages).” In addition, at the time of issuance of the written diagnosis of the above injury, E said that “in the joints of the left mouth and the bones part of the body of the Defendant at the time of issuance of the said written diagnosis,” and on August 24, 2014, 3 days before the said diagnosis was conducted, E was found to have been in the Defendant’s house, and was not the date when E was abused by the Defendant (the date of August 22, 2014), even according to the testimony of E. Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that there was an injury inflicted by the Defendant on the day of the instant medical examination of injury and the photograph.

(6) Around 06:00 on August 28, 2014, immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, such as the bloodtain of E house, a police officer called out taken pictures of E’s house condition. At that time, the lower-shaped dives of sand was cut down into the floor of a ward, and sand was found in the floor of a ward, shock, the inner floor, bed, bed, bed and bits, and kids were found (a investigative record, 57, 59 pages), and as a result, the string reaction was found on the floor of a ward (the investigation record, 272 through 277 pages). However, it cannot be readily concluded that the said dives were caused by the Defendant’s act on the day of the instant case.

C. Thus, since each of the facts charged is without proof of crime, it is not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The presiding judge, judge and judge

Judges Cho Jae-hwan

Judge Park Jae-il

1) Although the facts charged are indicated as "the 19th day of the same month", in light of the victim's prosecutor's office and the statements in this court, it is obvious that it is a clerical error, and it is corrected as stated in the facts charged.

2) Although the facts charged are indicated as the same place as the above paragraph (a), in light of the recording record, etc. on May 20, 2014, the defendant made the above speech during telephone conversations with the victim, and thus, it is corrected as stated in the facts charged. The following clause (d) also applies.

3) The evidence list is indicated as CDs, but in fact, it is an external cover.

4) As a result of the 2014-597(Seoul Office)/14-597-99 of the evidence list Nos. 125 Nos. 125, the time was specified by ascertaining the characteristics of the video/D/iPhone5 Picides 142014/961VBL/IMF 6552. Gmv files.

5) The evidence list Nos. 125 Nos. 125 verified the characteristics of the 2014-597 (Seoul Office)/14 5979 and identified time by ascertaining the results of / Dong image/D/iPhone Picides Picides Group 142014/846AMICE. IMF 7180.Momv files.