A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 14:00 on September 30, 2019, the Defendant: (a) committed an indecent act against the victim D (a) who first considered the victim D (a person, her life, her age, 35) in the Gumi-si B, with the intent to force indecent act by force; (b) her her her son who drive away from the victim’s behind her hand, her her her her her son, and (c) committed an indecent act by force against the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made by the police in relation to D;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 298 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The main sentence of Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The main sentence of Article 16 (2) and Article 16 (4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against Probation or Order to

1. Article 47(1) and Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Exempted from an order to disclose or notify information, 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 (it is deemed that it is necessary to keep such information more than once considering the content of the crime, the attitude of the crime, and the Defendant’s wish to have his/her occupation);

1. A doctor’s diagnosis that the defendant needs a long-term mental observation and treatment due to symptoms, such as intellectual disability (I Q Q 50, 50, 3 disability), bipolartic disorder, and non-quality mental disorder, etc.; the defendant was found to have achieved a low degree of achievement of curriculum at the time of his/her school creativity and was found to lack of compliance spirit; the fact that the probation office failed to respond to questions in which specific circumstances are required to be explained in the course of the investigation or somewhat difficult terms; and that there was a somewhat wide scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopher.

However, the Defendant appears to be able to have been able to say that the victim was able to do so on the street at the time of the instant case.