2017Gohap291A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

2017Gohap334(combined). (b) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kamera)

2017Gohap382(combined), motion picture

2017Gohap456(combined)(c) Gonggres

(d) Violation of the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts;

(sexual traffic)

(e) Embezzlement;

(f) Violation of the Aggravated Punishment Act;

Hack)

(g) Violation of the Road Traffic Act;

1. (a) b. A;

2. (a) B

3. (a)(b)(f) C

4. b. D. D.

5. (c) E.

6.(c)(e) F;

Orsc, Kim Ho-ho (prosecutions), and official leathers (Trial)

Law Firm G, Attorneys H (Defendant A and D)

Attorney I (National Assembly for the defendant B)

J Law Firm, Attorneys K (Defendant C)

L Law Firm, Attorneys Min (Defendant E)

Law Firm N, Attorney Kim Jae-soo (for defendant F)

August 25, 2017

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, by imprisonment for 3 years and 6 months, by imprisonment for Defendant B, by imprisonment for 4 years and 6 months, by imprisonment for Defendant C, by imprisonment with prison labor for 4 years and 6 months, by Defendant D for 8 months, by imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, by Defendant E, and by imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years.

Defendant A, B, C, and D shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours each.

The period of the registration of personal information of Defendant A, B, and C shall be 15 years, respectively.

The evidence Nos. 3 and 19 from the defendant C shall be confiscated.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kamerla, etc.) due to the provision of photographs to Defendant A and B shall be acquitted.

The summary of the acquittal part in the judgment against Defendant A and B shall be publicly notified, respectively.

Criminal facts

【Criminal Power】

Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Incheon District Court’s Branch on September 12, 2013, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on January 7, 2014. Defendant B was sentenced to a suspended sentence of eight months for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the Ansan District Court’s Ansan Branch on July 16, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 24, 2014. Defendant D was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at Seoul High Court on September 4, 2014 and three years for a suspended sentence of two years and six months for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the Incheon District Court on July 17, 2014, and Defendant F was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. at the Incheon District Court on July 17, 2014.

【Criminal Facts】

"2017 Highly 291"

1. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant D

On March 27, 2012, the Defendants agreed with C to take a face of the victim P (the age of 69), the president of the ○○ Group, to take a face of sexual intercourse similar to the female victims in the name of the victim, and then on March 28, 2012, C provided Defendant B with a credit card and passenger car necessary to purchase the said car, and the Defendants purchased two car-type car-type car-type car, such as a car-type car, in an electronic shop on board the said car, with a credit card.

After that, around March 31, 2012, Defendant D took a visual image of the victims of a similar sexual intercourse with the victim P and female victims in his name in the state of body using a car-type pen installed in Q 103 of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Q 103.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with C to take photographs of the body of other persons who may cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a camera, against their will.

2. Defendant D’s crime

A. On March 31, 2012, the Defendant committed sexual intercourse similar to P around March 31, 2012 with three in-named women, and received five million won from P.

Accordingly, the defendant committed sexual traffic in collusion with three women in poor name.

B. Around January 5, 2013, the Defendant, along with three female females in name, committed sexual intercourse similar to P at the residence of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government R, and received five million won from P.

Accordingly, the defendant committed sexual traffic in collusion with three women in poor name.

C. On April 19, 2013, the Defendant: (a) committed sexual intercourse similar to P around April 19, 2013, with three female women under name; and (b) received five million won from P, at the place described in the foregoing paragraph (b).

Accordingly, the defendant committed sexual traffic in collusion with three women in poor name.

D. On June 3, 2013, the Defendant, along with four female women in bad name, committed sexual intercourse similar to P at the place described in the foregoing paragraph (b) and received five million won from P.

Accordingly, the defendant committed sexual traffic in collusion with four women in poor name.

3. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant C

The Defendants made a mutual resolution to receive money by threatening the victim by using data to verify the sexual traffic of the victim P, such as video images taken together as described in the above paragraph (1).

From March 2013 to June 1, 2013, the Defendants sent an auxiliary storage (USB) in which the data to verify the victim’s sexual traffic is stored to the beauty room used by the victim S in Gangnam-gu Seoul and the O group building information room in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seoul, to T, and then sent the victim’s sexual traffic to ○○○ Group employees, and then received KRW 1.6 billion in total from 200 million in the account in the name of 16 billion in the name of ○○ Group employees in contact with e-mail, or demanded money from ○○ Group employees in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, to exchange with e-mail or from ○○ Group employees in the name of ○○ Group employees in Seoul, and received KRW 2.5 billion in the name of 16 billion in the account around June 14, 2013, the Defendants received KRW 500,000 in the name of 360,000 won in the account of 160,000 won in the account.

As a result, the Defendants conspired in collusion to receive property by causing the victim.

4. Crimes by Defendant F;

On June 16, 2013, AA received a request from the victim A, who was a pro-Japanese job in Vietnam, to find out an auxiliary memory device (USB) in which data to verify the sexual traffic of the P, such as video taken within the victim's Ecuas car as described in paragraph (1), were stored.

Accordingly, the Defendant, along with A, found the victim's auxiliary memory devices in the Ecuadic vehicle parked in front of 9-1, 45 U.S., Nam-gu, Incheon, at around that time, at the head of the Nam-gu, Incheon, 45-1, and as a result, A was found to have an auxiliary memory device, it was false that A did not have an auxiliary memory device for the victim together with A, and the Defendant was equipped with an auxiliary memory device from A, after the Defendant resolved to have an auxiliary memory device.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property in collusion with AA.

5. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant C, Defendant E, and Defendant F

The Defendants, along with their names infinites, resolved to receive money by threatening victims P using auxiliary storage devices (USB) embezzled by Defendant F, as described in the above paragraph (4).

From July 2013 to August 2013, 2013, the Defendants stated that the Defendant sent to the executives of the AB a cell phone, an executive of 00 group of the victim’s sexual traffic, a dynamic image to confirm the victim’s sexual traffic, and had a video image capable of confirming the victim’s sexual traffic by posting the phone to the executives of the ○○ Group’s name, and then sent e-mail from the employees of the ○○ Group’s name in contact with the ○○ Group’s name unexponed e-mail to the ○○ Group’s name and off-mail, or demanded the victim’s money at the ○○ Group’s hotel coffee shop in Gangnam-gu Seoul and then received 60 million won from the victim, and around August 13, 2013, the Defendants received 300 million won from among the above coffee shop.

As a result, the Defendants received property in collusion with the victim in collusion.

"2017 Gohap34"

6. On March 27, 2012, Defendant C, along with A, B, and D, decided to take a face of the victim P (the age of 69), the president of ○○ Group, to take a face of a similar sexual intercourse with the female victims, and on March 28, 2012, the Defendant provided B with a credit card and a car necessary to purchase the said car, and the Defendant purchased two Kamera in the form of a car, such as a car-type car, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car-type, a car

After that, around March 31, 2012, D took a visual image of the victims of a similar sexual intercourse with the victim P and female victims in the name of the victim who were placed in a bank in the residence of Q 103 of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Q 103.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with A, B, and D, taken the body of others who may cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a camera, against their will.

"2017Gohap382"

7. At around December 16, 2016, at around 00:20, Defendant C, while talking about the victim AF (the age of 48) who is a taxi driver in a taxi operating a Dong-dong IC among the Seoul metropolitan cycle Highway located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, 2016, the victim stated, “I am a little change in the same way that the son has good women,” the victim called, “I am a little change in the same way that the son has good women. I am a bit of bit bit of bitch bit of bitch bit of bitch, I am a victim’s shoulder and the rear part of the bit part of the bitle-si, which was driven, and caused the victim’s injury, such as the Gyeong-gu Gyeong, which requires treatment for about two weeks.”

Accordingly, the defendant injured the driver of a vehicle in operation.

"2017, 456"

8. On September 13, 2016, at around 22:52, Defendant A reported that Defendant A driven a drinking alcohol by a police officer AI who belongs to the above earth while under the influence of alcohol, such as that Defendant was unable to walk properly and the Defendant was seated, etc., at around 30 minutes, Defendant A was demanded to comply with a drinking alcohol measurement by inserting the part of a drinking measuring instrument three-minutes.

Nevertheless, the defendant refused this and did not comply with a police officer's request for a drinking test without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

§ 1 and 6 of the ruling

1. Defendant A, B, and D’s respective legal statements, and part of Defendant C’s legal statements

1. The witness A and part of each legal statement in B (with respect to the defendant C);

1. Each prosecutor's statement to AJ and AK;

1. Investigation report, investigation report (verification of the fact that the act of similarity comparison of the chairperson of the PP committee has been taken), preparation of a record book and report (recording a record book) in writing, investigation report (verification of details of purchase of a c-credit card), investigation report (verification of details of purchase of a c-related e-mail in the USB seized to C), investigation report (verification of contact with AK in the Handphone of a suspect A), investigation report (verification of contact with a suspect at the Handphone of a suspect A), investigation report (verification of contact address of AK in the Handphone of a suspect A and the e-mail address of AK);

1. The CD (No. 59 of evidence No. 2017, 291, 334);

[Judgment 2] Facts

1. Defendant D’s legal statement

1. Investigative report, investigative report (verification of the fact that the act of similarity with the chairperson of the PP committee has been taken), preparation of a record book and reporting thereon (recordbook 56) and investigation report (in USB confiscated toC, confirmation of the video images and photographs of the PP transactions);

1. The CD (No. 59 of evidence No. 2017, 291, 334);

"Fact 3 in the market"

1. Defendant A and B’s respective legal statements, Defendant C’s partial legal statements

1. The witness A and part of each legal statement in B (with respect to the defendant C);

1. The prosecutorial protocol Nos. 4 and 5 of the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant C, each part of the prosecutorial protocol No. 6 and 8 of the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant A, the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant B, and the suspect interrogation protocol No. 4 and 6 of the defendant

1. Statement by the prosecution against AM;

1. Investigation report (verification of details of transactions in the account in the name of X bank), investigation report (verification of Y's family relationship), investigation report (verification of KRW 600 million deposited in the AL), investigation report (Attachment to mobile analysis data on suspect C's mobile phones);

1. The CD (No. 59 No. 59 of the Evidence List 2017 Gohap291, 334);

[Judgment 4] Facts

1. Defendant F’s legal statement

1. Each legal statement of witness A, E, and C;

1. The second prosecutor's statement made to A;

[Judgment] No. 5]

1. The legal statement of Defendant E, each part of Defendant C and F’s legal statement

1. The fifth prosecutor's protocol of examination of the suspect against Defendant C, which contains some statements;

1. Statement by the prosecution against AM;

1. AB's statement;

1. Investigation report (Attachment, such as a letter, e-mail output, passport copy, etc. seized by the office of C), investigation report (verification of the details deposited into the account by the suspect C and E out of the amount of KRW 300 million received by the AL);

1. The CD (No. 59 No. 2017, 291, 334)

Facts of Decision 7

1. Defendant C’s legal statement

1. The police statement concerning AF;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

Facts of Decision 8

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. A witness B and each legal statement of NN;

1. Partial statement of the suspect interrogation protocol of Defendant A by the prosecution, and the suspect interrogation protocol of Defendant B by the prosecution;

1. A written statement ofN;

1. Investigation reports (12 Reporting on confirmation of a list of reported cases);

1. A copy of the ledger of use of the drinking-free measuring instrument, the 112 report handling table, and the report on the situation of the drinking driver;

1. A previous record in the judgment of a photograph, CCTV image CD;

1. Inquiry results, respective criminal records, foreign crimes, and data about criminal investigation records;

1. A report on the results of confirmation before each disposition;

1. Investigation reports (Attachment to written decisions against A of a suspect), investigation reports (Attachment to written decisions, etc. on the F of a suspect), investigation reports (Attachment to B of written decisions of a suspect);

Judgment on the Defendants and defense counsel's assertion

1. Summary of the assertion

A. As to Defendant A’s 2017 Gohap456 case, there was a fact that the Defendant did not respond to the police’s request for a drinking test at the time. However, the Defendant driven the vehicle, and the Defendant also was unable to comply with the request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds, on the ground that: (a) the Defendant, a driver, driven the vehicle by driving the vehicle; and (b) the Defendant was at the prices of the body left after the snow from B, which was fit with the snow, and the spirit was mixed with each other; (c) the Defendant

B. Defendant C.

1) As to paragraph 6 of the judgment

A, B, and D only viewed a photograph of a video image taken by the Defendant around December 201, and there is no instruction or participation in the photographing of the video.

2) As to paragraph 3 of the judgment

The Defendant had money to go to China via Vietnam, and the Defendant was cut off the ecket of a Vietnam flight aircraft, and Company A and B did not know that she received KRW 600 million from the above victim in Vietnam by threatening the victim P, and there was no fact that the Defendant conspireded to receive the above money.

3) As to paragraph 5 of the judgment

Although there was a fact that the Defendant discussed F, E, and P with a video image of sexual traffic with the victim P, the Defendant actually confirmed and transmitted contact information only to the ○○ Group related persons, and F and E led the process of delivering video or receiving KRW 300 million from the said victim.

Therefore, the defendant is merely one that facilitates the above F and E criminal acts, and thus constitutes an aiding and abetting person who is not a joint principal offender.

C. Defendant F

Although the defendant decided to receive money from the victim P by using the USB brought from C and E along with the USB brought by the defendant from C and E, the defendant did not actually receive the money from the above victim, only attempted money is established for the defendant.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on Defendant A’s assertion

1) Relevant legal principles

Article 148-2 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act provides that a person who has reasonable grounds to recognize that a person is under the influence of alcohol refuses to comply with a measurement by a police officer pursuant to Article 44 (2) of the same Act. In addition, Article 44(2) of the same Act provides that if a police official deems it necessary for traffic safety and prevention of danger or if there are reasonable grounds to recognize that a person driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is under the influence of alcohol in violation of paragraph (1) of the same Article, the driver may undergo a breath test of whether the person under the influence of alcohol is under the influence of alcohol and the driver shall comply with such a breath test of the police officer. Accordingly, the person who is obliged to comply with a request for a sobreath test by a police officer on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the person driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) of the same Act is the driver of the relevant motor vehicle, and if the person is not the driver of the relevant motor vehicle, the person may not comply with a drinking test (see, etc.).

2) Determination

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant driving the instant vehicle from the roads of the YAF to the 270 street from the roads of the YAF to the 270 street, and it is recognized that the police officer did not comply with the request of the defendant for a drinking test even though the police officer was under the influence of alcohol, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in paragraph (8) of the judgment below. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant and the defense counsel is rejected.

A) At the investigative agency and this court, B, the Defendant, along with the Defendant on the day of the instant case, drinking alcohol while drinking alcohol at a AP restaurant located in Chungcheongnam-gun AP on the same day. Since drinking was rarely drinking, after eating the instant vehicle, served as AR in front of the AO Agricultural Cooperative for the purpose of morale during driving the instant vehicle. There was an advertising wind line set up by the Defendant at the driver’s seat and damaged the wind line, and the Defendant was able to take a view to those who were on the side of the instant vehicle, and the Defendant was 1 to have been stopped at the 3rd of the instant vehicle. In addition, the Defendant was 1 to have stopped on the 4th of the instant vehicle on the 1st of the instant case and 5th of the instant vehicle, and 1 to have the Defendant stopped at the 5th of the instant vehicle, and 5th of the vehicle stopped at the 6th of the vehicle, the Defendant was able to have his vehicle stopped at the 6th of the road, and 2nd of the vehicle back to the front.

B) Around 14:00, 14:00, the first driver reported to the police that the driver was driving the vehicle in question through AS vehicle and reported to the driver of the vehicle in question in the direction of the village in front of the AS Agricultural Cooperatives (the 2017dahap456) (the 10th record of evidence). As to the circumstances reported in this court, the driver was driving the vehicle in question through the restaurant operator in front of the ASnin house, and the driver was driving the vehicle in front of the vehicle, and the driver was working on the opposite part of the vehicle, and the driver was working on the opposite part of the vehicle. Since the driver was driving the vehicle, the driver was making the driver to drive the vehicle in front of the driver's seat, and thereafter, he was driving the vehicle in front of the driver's seat and made the driver make the driver make the first report to the effect that the driver was 2 meters away from the driver's influence.

C) According to CCTV images taken in front of the driver’s seat on the day of the instant case, on the ground that the first vehicle was stopped in front of the AR, the first vehicle was parked in front of the AR, on the ground that the B, coming from the driver’s seat, was opened, and the Defendant and surrounding persons gather around the instant vehicle, and divided the stories, and then, on the ground that the Defendant and surrounding persons walk in the vicinity of the instant vehicle, followed the Defendant’s moving back to the vehicle behind the instant vehicle and stop on the flick and walk in the road, and then, on the ground that the Defendant flicked in the direction of the AR, it is consistent with each of the above statements on the circumstances of the instant case of B andN.

D) In addition, the defendant stated that "I would like to escape from the place," and stated that "I would like to recognize the facts of driving from Kindo to Kindo," and that I would like to recognize the facts of driving from Kindo. At the time of the above circumstances, B was suffering from white in the test paper and was in the body form (176 cm, 67 km). On the other hand, while the defendant was suffering from hard half and passed through find body, the defendant also recognized the fact that I would like to go to Kindo and Sindo as the fact that he was find with the advertisement wind line, the driver who reported N in this case seems to be the defendant.

E) Meanwhile, the defendant asserts that there was no circumstance to recognize that he had driven at the time of drinking, and that he could not respond to a request for alcohol measurement by a police officer because he did not have a high price fluence. However, the first police officer's identification was confirmed at the present site upon receipt of a report "AS white flusium." ② The name and resident registration number of AT was presented while the defendant was confirmed, ② the police officer was arrested as a flagrant offender in violation of the Resident Registration Act. ③ On September 22, 2016, the defendant was present at the H district around 15, 600, and the defendant was unable to be seen as having met the demand of a police officer for alcohol alcohol consumption at the time of 200, 600, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7, 5, 7, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 5, 6, 7, 6, 4, 6, 7, 6, 6, 4, 7, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 4, .

B. Judgment on Defendant C’s assertion

1) Relevant legal principles

In order to establish a joint principal offender under Article 30 of the Criminal Act, it is necessary to implement a crime through a functional control based on the joint will as a subjective element. Here, the intent of joint process is insufficient to recognize another person’s criminal act and to allow it without restraint, and it should be one of the joint efforts to commit a specific criminal act with the intent of another person. Provided, That it is sufficient that there is a trade name that each accomplice should either meet the elements of a crime or share the elements of a crime in essence among the accomplices (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do6706, Sept. 11, 2008; 2002Do995, Jun. 24, 2004).

A public offering in a co-offender relationship does not require any legal form of punishment, but is a combination of two or more persons’ intent to realize a crime through a joint processing. A public offering is established even in cases where several persons are engaged in a group of intent in a successive or secret manner. In addition, strict proof is required for the recognition of such public offering. However, in cases where a defendant denies the public offering, which is a subjective element of a crime, it cannot be proven by means of proving indirect or circumstantial facts that are relevant to the nature of an object (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do5220, Aug. 30, 2012).

2) Determination

A) Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court as to paragraph (6) of the judgment, Defendant C and the defense counsel’s assertion is not accepted, since Defendant C and the defense counsel are unable to accept the allegation, in collusion with A, B, and D as stated in the crime under paragraph (6) of the judgment, for the victims of sexual intercourse between P and female victims in the name of the victim and sexual intercourse.

(1) A and B, who actively participated in the shooting of the instant sexual traffic videos, stated that they had taken the instant video images in collusion with Defendant C as follows.

① At the investigation agency and this court consistent, “A” heard the speech that he had engaged in the act of similarity with D P at the victim’s house, and asked D to take a surface of similarity with D. D on December 11, 2011. D showed that he had shown B and B in China at that time. After that, on March 1, 2012, Defendant C had shown the foregoing image to C, a pro-friendly type B at D’s house located in Ansan, and Defendant C had shown that “I might take more than before? I 1 am? I am 1 to 3, 201, but I am 1 to 30, 200, 300, 1 to 3,000, and 1 to 3,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,000.

② At the end of December 11, 201, B, along with A in the investigative agency and this court, there was a fact that D had shown a sexual traffic motion picture of the victim P, which was taken on December 11, 201 with China. After that, on March 2012, 201, Defendant C called Defendant C, who was a friendly police officer, had a sexual traffic motion picture of the victim P, which was taken on December 11, 201 at the house of Defendant COD, and Defendant C could have seen a video motion picture of the victim.

In addition, Defendant C made a statement to the effect that “the equipment should also disappear, and the expense should also be borne by the company following the following day,” and that Defendant C obtained SM7 passenger cars and credit cards from Defendant C and purchased Manamera at the lux electronic shop with Defendant C and D. D made a motion picture photograph, and C was sent to A at the same time, but C was s/he was s/he was s/he was s/he was s/he was satized, and at that time, sent the motion picture taken to A” (Article 2017 Gohap291, 334 Evidence Record No. 661 through 664).

③ Comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned statements made by A and B, Defendant C used the video images made on December 11, 201 to be continuously taken by A and B, and Defendant C used them to purchase malomera by providing vehicles and credit cards due to lack of expenses. Each of the above statements made by A and B is a relatively concrete statement about the circumstances of the crime, and most of the major parts are consistent and consistent with each other, and their credibility is high. In addition, it is difficult for Defendant C and B to find any motive to further attract Defendant C to commit their own crimes with the confession of their crimes, and it is difficult to find any reasonable ground to see the Defendant C’s falsity as a relative of Defendant C. Moreover, it is difficult to find any reasonable ground to see the Defendant C’s falsity partially by raising false facts.

(2) According to the records of Defendant C’s card use, it is possible to verify the settlement of KRW 225,00,00 from “AU” around March 28, 2012, and KRW 2,00,00 from “AV”. This is consistent with the statement that A and B purchased Mamermermeras at a p.m. electronic shop using the vehicle and credit card provided by Defendant C. In addition, D, on March 31, 2012, took photographs of the victim P’s sexual traffic video using the above Mameras. In the instant crime, D, which was necessarily necessary to take the Mameras to take the Mamermeras, and at the time, it was difficult for Defendant C to purchase Mameras without the aid of Defendant C in light of the economic power of both A and B, and thus, Defendant C’s act of purchasing Mameras with its own card seems to have been necessarily allowed to be necessary for its purchase of Mameras.

(3) 한편, 피고인 C은 동생 B이 생활고를 겪고 있어 2012년 구정 이후 B에게 생활비에 사용하라며 신용카드를 주었고, 피고인 C은 주말에만 차량을 이용하므로 주중에 B이 이용하게 해달라고 하여 빌려주었을 뿐, A 등이 자신의 신용카드로 몰래카메라를 구입한 사실을 알지 못하였다고 주장한다. 그러나 ① B은 이 법정에서 카메라를 구입하자 피고인 C에게 전화가 와 '이러이러해서 카메라를 샀다'고 하자 피고인 C이 '알았다'며 전화를 끊었다고 진술하고 있고, ② 피고인 C과 B 사이의 문자메시지 내역 ( 2017고합291, 334 증거기록 제2792쪽)에 의하면, 피고인 C은 B이 카드를 사용한 내역에 대하여 즉각적으로 확인) (주유를 두 번 한 것이 맞는지에 대하여 확인)하는 모습을 보이고 있는바, 이와 같은 피고인 C의 성격에 비추어 2012. 3. 28.경 AU에서 225,000원, AV에서 200,000원이 결제된 내역에 대하여 알지 못하였거나 확인하지 않았다는 것은 쉽게 납득할 수 없는 점, ③ B의 출입국현황(2017고합291, 334』 증거기록 제635쪽)에 의하면 B은 2012년 구정(2012. 1. 23.) 이후 2012. 2. 1. 중국으로 출국하여 2012. 3. 20.경 다시 입국하였는바, 출국한 동안에도 국내에서 계속하여 위 신용카드를 이용하여 결제한 내역이 존재하는 점 등에 비추어 보면, 피고인 C의 위 주장은 그대로 믿기 어렵다.

(4) Furthermore, Defendant C also known AL organization and the list of reporters managed by AW group after the combination of the instant sexual traffic videos was taken, and it was recognized that A knew of AK’s e-mail by informing AK of the e-mail. Such Defendant C’s behavior is difficult to be understood as an act of a person unrelated to the instant sexual traffic videos, and in particular, it is against the common sense that A, who lives with Defendant C without any occupation, informed A of the address of AK’s e-mail, an executive officer (or executive officer) of the company he works for A, without any justifiable reason. Rather, it appears that A, etc., conspired to take and utilize the instant sexual traffic videos videos and other similar actions were conducted.

B) Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court as to Paragraph (3) of the judgment, Defendant C and the defense counsel’s assertion is not accepted, since Defendant C and the defense counsel are fully admitted by threatening with Defendant A and B by using materials verifying the sexual traffic of the victim P, such as the facts constituting the crime described in paragraph (3) of the judgment, and by threatening the above victim to receive KRW 600 million in total.

(1) Defendant A and B stated that Defendant C was also involved in the receipt of money by threatening the victim as follows.

① Defendant A denied the first crime of this case and recognized all of the crimes from the prosecution six times. After that, from March 2013 to May 2, 2013, Defendant A and the investigative agency and the court of this case frequently gathered with B, C, and drinked with B and C during drinking, and it is difficult for C to keep the location in AW, so it would be difficult for C to present AL amount.

At around May 2012, in order to be used for AL and public use, the term “mail confirmation line” was sent to a beauty shop using T, with the name of the page and the page “AL”. After that, the AL group sent the USB in which one victim’s screen image is stored, and then sent it to T. At the early time, C sent the USB to the author with contact with the author in the relationship with AL and sent him two stories. At the time, C sent the USB to the head office of AL in accordance with C, and B sent the email two times. C, from time to time, provided that the Defendant provided the Defendant with the victim’s screen to use the copyrighted image, and provided the Defendant with the victim’s screen to use the copyrighted image, and provided the Defendant with the victim’s screen screen to use it as a whole. C, at the same time, provided that the Defendant provided the Defendant with the victim’s screen and other necessary advice to use the copyrighted image, and provided the Defendant with some information to use it in the AL.

(2017Gohap291) Evidence No. 1545 to 1549, 2364 to 2367, 2391 of evidence records of 2017

② At the first time, Defendant B denied the instant crime and recognized the instant crime from the prosecution 4 times, and thereafter, from March 2013 to May 5, 2013, the investigative agency and this court had USB two times in the AL Group Seocho-gu, and had an interview shop used by C with A with A.C. The part participating in the instant crime was expressed from time to time to time, how C receives money from AL, and when C used the body work in the name of DL, it was 100 to use the body work for which the identity is not revealed, and 10 to request C. 19 to use the A.C. 19 to provide money from A. 4 to B.C. 1 to B.C. 9 to request C. 9 to provide money from the victim with the victim’s sexual traffic, and C. 1 to B.C. 9 to request C. 9 to provide money from AL. 3 to B.C. 1 to B.C. 9 to use the victim’s sexual traffic.

③ The above statements about Defendant A and B’s participation in the instant crime are specific and main contents consistent with each other. As seen earlier, it is credibility in that it is difficult for Defendant A and B to find any reasonable grounds to recognize both Defendant A and B to bring Defendant C in the instant crime.

(2) On June 10, 2013, Defendant C also recognized the fact that Defendant A, B, A, and F had cut off the flight ticket with Defendant A, A, and F, and that Defendant B known the account number to him/her and known the account number.

However, Defendant C heard that Defendant A et al. carried money deposited in a bank from Vietnam to China through Vietnam and that Defendant A et al. continued to receive the money through Defendant B, so Defendant A et al., and notified the account number in the name of AY.

However, in the fourth investigation of Defendant C, it is difficult for the prosecution to recognize that “A will engage in transactions with AL and have been aware of it to be BL. The intention to engage in a transaction with AL is to threaten AL with the victim’s video image. If A and B would receive money from B, I would have the honor to do so (2017 high-priced291, No. 1538, 1539 of the evidence records) to obtain money from the victim, and I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to receive money from the victim and I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to receive money from the victim, and that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to receive money from the victim and I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to receive money from the victim and I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would have to receive money from the victim and I would like to know that I would be necessary.

In light of the above circumstances, Defendant C’s above assertion is difficult to believe.

(3) 피고인 C은 피고인 B이 베트남에 거주하는 동안 '카드사 난리남 결재가 안되어 문제발생 빨리 해결하자 꼼짝못하고 있다', '넘하는거 아니냐 돈카드 필요할 때 마음은 어디가고 통장 돈 보내라', '너희 통장에 있는 돈 보내주면 카드값은 막을 텐데 해결하는 쪽으로 하자', 'AZ이 받은 금액은 얼마냐? 우리에게 줄 수 없는 금액이냐?', '이제 아쉬운 부탁할게 없다는 거지, 카드는 엄청 쓰고 대책은 없고 죽으란 얘기냐?', '아쉬울땐 숨 넘어가면서 부탁하고 이제 여유가 되니 무시하고 지원해준 덕은 없는 거냐?', '2.5억 D 5천 AZ 1억 늬네 1.5억 늬네 처자식들은 살리고 난 참 비참하다', '개세끼들 경비가 있으니 필요없다 이거지 카드값 지원해준 것 나는 뭐냐', '늬네들이 사람이냐 인간도 아니다 오천씩 준다고 한 돈 어디로 갔냐', '늬네들은 인간 쓰레기다 돈 좀 있으니 연락할 필요 없다 이거지 난 죽는데', '사기칠 때가 없어서 형제에게 사기치냐 놀아나지 마라', '약속한 7월말인데 소식 없냐?'라는 문자메시지를 피고인 B에 보내기도 하였다( 2017고합291, 증거기록 제2794 내지 2798쪽). 위 내용을 종합하면 피고인 C은 피고인 A, B이 누군가로부터 금원을 교부받는 것을 전제로 연체된 카드값을 갚기 위해 받은 금액의 일부를 입금해 달라고 요청하고 있는바, 돈의 출처에 관한 내용이나 중국 은행에 관한 내용은 찾아볼 수 없다는 점에서 피고인 C도 피해자로부터 금원을 교부받는 사실을 알고 있었던 것으로 보인다.

(4) As seen earlier, Defendant C took part in the victim’s video shooting of sexual traffic. The fact that Defendant A and B, who independently planned and carried out the instant crime, by excluding Defendant C who provided subsidies and financial assistance from the time of the video shooting, was natural shot in itself, and that the instant crime without Defendant C’s aid is difficult to be carried out.

(5) On the other hand, Defendant F, at the time of Vietnam, who brought 300 million won or more to the USB from the victim's sexual traffic dynamics around the time of the occurrence of the victim's sexual traffic dynamics in the USB, appeared to have been aware of the following facts: (a) this part of the case (C) instructed the victim to do so so in this court; (b) this part of the case (C) did not follow the direction; (c) did not follow the direction; and (d) discussed BAC with the victim; and (c) "I knew that I had known that I had the USB, and first discussed E-type test; and (d) before that, the person C had the phone number or such BA; and (e) the same shall apply to C; and (e) the person who requested the defendant to appear to have been aware of the fact that I had aided; and (e) this part of the case was attempted to assist the defendant to do so."

C) Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court as to Paragraph (5) of the judgment, Defendant C’s assertion by Defendant E, F, and the defense counsel is not accepted, since Defendant C merely attempted to make the victim P and received KRW 300 million from the above victim easy to commit the crime, it is not merely limited to aiding and abetting the co-offenders to commit the crime, but it can be sufficiently recognized that Defendant C and the defense counsel engaged in the crime like the record of the crime under Paragraph (5) in the market, by actively taking part in the process of committing the crime and actively taking part in the process of committing the crime.

(1) Defendant E and F stated to the effect that Defendant C took part in the instant crime and planned and carried out it as follows.

① At this time, Defendant E and the investigative agency and this court showed the information of the victim’s sexual traffic motion images and AL, and Defendant E, with the USB, expressed her speech to the AL applicant in the manner. Since it did not serve as one month thereafter, Defendant E met F, C, and nameless winners at the restaurant located in Bupyeong-si, Busan. Defendant E talked on how to communicate with the AL, while providing meals, and confirmed the name and telephone number of the AL-related persons by using a number of service calls of the C in the same place, and C directly called a cell phone to the AL-related person and was not subject to a telephone.

F had a sexual traffic video image of the victim, and had a contact with AL to demand money from AL with a video file. In other words, a man with low and F, C, and a man with no name had a lot of discussions about how to communicate with AL-related persons, and discussed how to receive money after delivery of the victim's sexual traffic dynamics to the USB where sexual traffic is stored.In short, C had a telephone conversation with AL-related persons, and C had a contact with AL-related persons by sending e-mail address and passwords to BL-mail. At any time, C had a telephone conversation with FO, and sent AL-related persons with a telephone call to B, and sent AL-related persons with 1.7 billion won for the first time, and 3 billion won for e-mail and 400 million won for e-mail sent to C and 1.3 billion won for e-mail.

‘The Statement was made to the effect that it was ‘(2017 Gohap291, No. 2353, 2354)’.

B From the three-time investigation conducted by the prosecution, the Defendant F discovered the USB containing the data of the victim, and changed the data to AA. On 2013, the Defendant F sent the USB to E, who reads the AL applicant, and thereafter made the phone call to C to secure A’s USB.

At the same time, I displayed the USB to C, and sent it to C, thereby making it possible to copy it. After that, C, E, and ASEAN, 4 persons, who are the main agents of C, E, and ASEAN, would receive money from AL by using the same image. C, who was notified of the phone number of AL executives, but did not seem to have a big interest. (2017Dahap2911, Evidence No. 2411, No. 2421, and this court stated that C was able to have different arguments, and that C was able to withdraw the USB. It was said that C was able to give up the USB after the completion.

③ Each of the above statements by Defendant E and F discussed from the beginning to demand money from the victim by using Defendant C and C’s dynamic image, notified Defendant C of contact address with the AL-related person, even if discussed thereafter and sent e-mail, it was possible for Defendant C to draw up the draft, and its credibility is difficult in that it is specific and significant mutually consistent with the circumstances leading up to the crime, and there is no reasonable ground to dismiss Defendant C.

(2) On July 2013, 2013, Defendant C also conducted an investigation into the prosecution 4 times, F with only 3 p.m. Defendant C had a e-mail interview with F, E, and P.m. F with a e-mail-related person, and F with a view to gathering money from AL-related persons by asking contact with those persons related to the AL Group, and informing F of FL-related person of the fact that F.m. Defendant F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 1’s contact with the victim’s sexual traffic video. The reason for asking the contact with the FL-related person was that the victim was to receive money from F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 1’s communication with the victim’s e-mail-related person, and that F. F. F. F. 3 did not have any other e-mail contact with the victim’s e-mail-related person.

(3) Defendant C itself recognizes the fact that he received KRW 100 million out of the amount of KRW 300 million from Defendant E. This shows that the share of the role he shared by Defendant C in the instant crime was equal to or rather than that of other accomplices.

(4) Defendant E and F promised that there does not exist any original and any form of data, and that Defendant E and F will accept any consideration (including criminal punishment) as well as return of money received if not a fact. In addition, Defendant C also demanded signature from Defendant E and F. In addition, even if Defendant C did not directly participate in the crime, it is difficult to easily obtain the request for signature from the victim. In addition, Defendant C stated that “AW Group was unable to sign on the ground that he did not participate in the crime,” rather than “the reason why he did not sign on each letter.”

(5) Even according to Defendant C’s statement, at the time of July 2013 to August 8, 2013, Defendant C had experienced considerable pressure due to heavy debt, and it seems that Defendant C actively participated in the instant crime with Defendant E, etc.

C. Determination on Defendant F’s assertion

The court stated to the effect that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court: ① Defendant E received KRW 300 million from the investigative agency and this court in cash; ② Defendant E stated that KRW 100 million, KRW 100 million, KRW 500,000,000, and KRW 4500,000,000; Defendant C also received KRW 100,000 from E; Defendant C also brought KRW 100,000,000 to E and F; Defendant E did not bring the remainder of KRW 100,000,000,000,000 won; ② Defendant E did not receive KRW 700,000,000 from the victim’s funds, and Defendant E did not receive KRW 270,000,000,000,000 from each other; ② Defendant E’s name and 3700,000,000,000 won.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant A: Article 13(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply); Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a) of the Criminal Act; Article 3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Amended by Act No. 13719, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply); Articles 350(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 148-2(1)2 and 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act (a)

(b) Defendant B: Article 13(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of being used and screened by Kameras), Article 3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Articles 350(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of conflict)

(c) Defendant C: Article 13(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of possession of a camera, etc.), Article 3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Articles 350(1) and 30 (a) and 30 (a) of the Criminal Act) of the Criminal Act, Articles 350(1) and 30 (a) and 30 (a) of the Criminal Act, the former part of Article 5-10(2) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

(d) Defendant D: Article 13(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 21(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Acts of Arranging Sexual Crimes, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(e) Defendant E: Articles 350(1) and 30(a) of the Criminal Act

(f) Defendant F: Articles 355(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 350(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

Defendant A, B, D, and C: Articles 40 and 50 of each Criminal Act [Punishments prescribed in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes)]

1. Selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Determination of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amerass, Use and photographing of Cameras) and a violation of the Road Traffic Act;

B. Defendant B: Decision of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kamerass and photographs)

C. Defendant C: Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amerasation and photographing) and choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of extortion

D. Defendant D: Selection of imprisonment with labor

E. Defendant E: Imprisonment option

F. Defendant F: Selection of imprisonment with prison labor

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant A: the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act [the crime of violating the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. as indicated in the judgment below] and the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kamera Use and Screening), and the violation of the Act on Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

B. Defendant B: the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

(c) Defendant D: the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

(d) Defendant F: the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant A: The crime of violation of the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes) and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (affordation) and the aggravated punishment within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes, which are more severe,

(b) Defendant B: The punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes within the scope of adding up the long-term punishment of the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes with heavy punishment to

(c) Defendant C: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment provided for in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, which is the largest offense)

(d) Defendant D: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (an aggravated punishment of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes with the largest punishment)

(e) Defendant F: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed for heavier concurrent crimes);

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant A, B, D, and E: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Order to complete programs;

Defendant A, B, C, and D: The main sentence of Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

1. Confiscation;

Defendant A and C: Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

[A public prosecutor also sought the confiscation of the key, pattern, camera (Evidence No. 2) against Defendant A, but the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor alone does not constitute a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes under paragraph (1) of the said judgment ( difficult to see it as an object, etc. provided or intended to be provided for the crime of using a camera, etc.) and shall not be confiscated.]

1. Exemption from an order for disclosure and notification;

Defendant A, B, C, and D: Article 4(1) of the Addenda to the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes ( December 18, 2012); 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

[The above Defendants did not have any record of punishment for sexual assault crimes before the crime of this case, and the crime of this case took a face of similarity for the purpose of demanding monetary amount, etc., and it is difficult to conclude that the above Defendants are in danger of sexual assault and recidivism. The above Defendants’ registration of personal information against the above Defendants and completion of sexual assault treatment programs can only be deemed to have the effect of preventing recidivism, and the above Defendants’ age, family environment, social relationship, and the effect of preventing sexual assault crimes, which can be achieved by the disclosure and notification orders, can be relatively less than the disadvantages and expected side effects to be suffered by the above Defendants, should be considered in full view of the following factors: (a) it is difficult to conclude that there is a special circumstance that the above Defendants should not disclose or notify personal information to the public.

1. The registration period of personal information;

Defendant A, B, and C: Article 45(4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 6(2) of the Addenda (No. 14412, Dec. 20, 2016)

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant A

A. As to paragraphs 1 and 3 of the holding

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for a year and six months from June to June 17 months; and

2) Since the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are concurrent relations with each other, the sentencing guidelines do not apply.

(iii)decision of sentence;

Defendant A knew of the victim’s sexual traffic from Defendant D, and asked Defendant D to take pictures of the victim’s sexual traffic for an illegal purpose. Defendant A notified the above fact to Defendant B, C, and in collusion with Defendant B, D, and C, committed the crime on a planned basis, such as purchase of the victim’s sexual traffic in collusion with Defendant B, D, and C, and installation of the victim’s sexual traffic in advance.

After that, Defendant A, Defendant B, and C received a total of 600 million won from the victim by threatening the victim with the video of the above sexual traffic. In addition, in light of the content of the crime, the details of the crime, the details of the crime, the method of the crime, the amount of the damage amount, and the amount of the damage amount, etc., the amount of damage inflicted upon the victim was not recovered at all, but did not reach an agreement with the victim, and it seems unlikely that the amount of damage would be recovered in the future in light of the economic ability of Defendant A. Such circumstances are disadvantageous to Defendant A.

However, considering the fact that Defendant A recognized all of the crimes of this case as favorable to the above Defendant, the circumstances favorable to the above Defendant should be taken into account, comprehensively taking into account the above Defendant’s age, character, conduct, family relation, living environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account equity in cases where the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (favour) in which judgment has become final

B. As to paragraph 4 of the judgment

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for six months to one year; or

2) Application of the sentencing criteria

The sentencing criteria are not set for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of the measurement).

(iii)decision of sentence;

Although there are reasonable grounds to recognize that Defendant A was driving under the influence of alcohol, the crime of this case did not comply with the request of a police officer for the measurement of drinking more than 30 minutes on three occasions prior to the instant case without justifiable grounds. It is not good in that the said Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had been punished twice as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) prior to the instant case, and even if he had the record of being punished twice prior to the instant case, it is true that the said Defendant committed the instant crime. Furthermore, the said Defendant consistently denies the instant crime for the purpose of evading punishment even though he stated that the said Defendant was driving by the witness and the witness on board the witness on whom the said Defendant reported on driving, and denies the instant crime. Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, considering the fact that there is a family member to support the defendant, the fact that the family member of the defendant wants to take a preference in this court, etc. in favor of the defendant, the defendant's age and character, living environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all sentencing factors in the trial process of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered.

2. Defendant B

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under Acts: Imprisonment for one year and six months from June to June 17 months; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria;

Since the judgment of the court is in the concurrent relation between the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, the sentencing guidelines do not apply.

(c) Determination of sentence;

Defendant B, in collusion with Defendant A, D, and C that the victim would engage in sexual traffic, committed the crime in a planned manner, such as purchasing blamera in collusion with Defendant A, D, and C to take a face of sexual traffic, and setting up it in a bank prepared for the victim. After that, Defendant B, Defendant A, and C received a total of 600 million won from the victim by threatening the victim with the aforementioned video. In light of the content of the crime, circumstances leading up to the crime, method of the crime, and scale of the amount of damage, etc., the crime is very good. In addition, Defendant B did not return all the amount of damage that the victim could have taken out from the victim, and did not reach an agreement with the victim, and the possibility of recovering the amount of damage in the future in light of the economic ability of the above Defendant. These circumstances are disadvantageous to Defendant B.

However, considering the fact that Defendant B recognized and reflected each of the instant offenses, etc. favorable to the above Defendant, the following factors should be comprehensively taken into account: the above Defendant’s age, character, conduct, family relationship, living environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the various sentencing conditions specified in the instant trial process, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be comprehensively taken into account; and the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment was rendered concurrently with the crime of violating the Act

3. Defendant C.

(a) The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment for not less than three years nor more than 45 years; and

(b) Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria;

1. Basic crime: the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Bribery) and Article 5 of the Judgment

[Determination of Punishment] Type 4 (at least 500 million won, less than 500 billion won)

【Special Convicted Person】

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, 3 years to 7 years

2. Class I Crimes: Crimes of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Crime of Violence against Drivers;

[Determination of Punishment] Crimes of Violence: Type 4 (Bodily Injury resulting from Violence to Drivers)

[Special Convicted Persons] Punishment (including serious efforts for the recovery of damage) or substantial part

Where damage has been restored:

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations] Reduction Area, 10 months to 2 years

3) Second concurrent crimes: The sentencing criteria is not set for offenses of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

4) Results of the application of the standards for dealing with multiple crimes: Since the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (use photographing by Kameras, etc.) with no sentencing guidelines set for three or more years is concurrent crimes, only the lower limit of the recommended punishment on

(c) Determination of sentence;

Defendant C, after hearing the fact that the victim’s sexual traffic was dynamics with Defendant A and confirming the fact that the victim’s sexual traffic had been dynamics, solicited Defendant A, etc. to commit the crime, and provided his credit card necessary to photograph sexual traffic dynamics. Thereafter, Defendant C provided contact numbers and contact numbers of group executives belonging to Defendant A and B, e-mail with the victim’s organization and related persons, and Defendant F and E provided information about the victim’s company’s telephone number to the victim, and carried out their initial e-mails. In addition, Defendant A and B did not appear to have been able to commit the crime by continuously subsidizing expenses. In light of the social status, career, economic ability, role, etc. of Defendant C and other Defendants, it appears that it would not be easy for the Defendant to commit the crime of this case without any prior consent to the crime of this case, and thus, Defendant C would not have been able to recover the amount of the victim’s sexual traffic from the victim’s unlawful act, and thus, Defendant C would not have been subject to any other criminal law.

However, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine for the defendant, and it seems that the amount of money obtained through the crime of robbery in Paragraph (3) of the judgment is not distributed, and in relation to Paragraph (7) of the judgment, the fact that the victim agreed smoothly with the victim and the victim does not want the punishment should be considered as favorable to the above defendant, considering the above defendant's age, character and behavior, living environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., as a whole, various sentencing conditions in the trial process of this case such as the above defendant's age and character, living environment

4. Defendant D

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor of 15 days to 3 years; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria;

Since the judgment of the court is in competition with the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, the sentencing criteria

(c) Determination of sentence;

Defendant D, as a matter of course, conspired with Defendant A, B, and C to have engaged in a similar sexual act similar to that of the victim, in collusion with Defendant A, B, and C, and planned sexual intercourses with the victim in return for the receipt of money from the victim four times. In particular, the core part of the crime is the fact that Defendant D was in charge of the direct shooting of sexual intercourses. In addition, the video recorded as above was used for the other Defendants to receive money by threatening the victim. Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the above Defendant.

However, considering the fact that the above defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case as favorable to the above defendant, the above defendant's age, character and conduct, family relation, living environment, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be comprehensively considered, and the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of equity with the case where the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) in which judgment becomes final and conclusive.

5. Defendant E

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: 15 days to 5 years; and

(b) Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] Type 3 (at least KRW 100,000, less than KRW 500,000) of General Promises

【Special Convicted Person】

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations] Basic Field, one year and six months to four years

(c) Determination of sentence;

Defendant E received KRW 300 million from the victim by threateninging the victim by using the victim’s sexual traffic video image in collusion with Defendant F, C, and the victim’s name impaired. In addition, the crime is not good in light of the content of the crime, the method of committing the crime, the scale of damage, etc. In addition, the above Defendant did not return all the amount of damage acquired from the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s sexual traffic, and did not reach an agreement with the victim, and it seems unlikely that the amount of damage will be recovered in the future in light of the economic ability of the above Defendant. Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the above Defendant.

However, the above defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected, and the fact that the above defendant appears to have participated in the crime of this case from Defendant F, etc., considering favorable circumstances for the above defendant, the above defendant's age and character, family relation, living environment, motive, means and result of the crime of this case, etc. shall be determined as ordered by taking into comprehensive account the various conditions of punishment as shown in the trial process of this case, such as the above defendant's age and character, family relation, living environment

6. Defendant F

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to 15 years; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria;

The sentencing criteria do not apply to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the concurrent relation between the crime of joint assault and the crime of Article 37 of the Criminal Code) which has become final and

(c) Determination of sentence;

Defendant F, in collusion with A, intended to take money from the victim C and E out the embezzlement by discovering the USB in which the victim’s sexual traffic screen images, etc. were stored in the tea, etc., and suggested that Defendant C and E commit the instant attack. After that, the above Defendant C and C were threatened with the victim by using sexual traffic screen pictures and received KRW 300 million from the victim. In light of the content of the crime, method of the crime, and scale of damage, etc., the crime is not good. In addition, the above Defendant did not return all the amount of damage acquired from the victim, and did not reach an agreement with the victim, and the possibility that the amount of damage will be recovered in the future in light of the economic ability of the above Defendant. Such circumstances are the circumstances unfavorable to the above Defendant.

However, the above defendant's assertion that each of the crimes of this case is recognized as substitute for each of the crimes of this case, and the facts that A, the victim of the embezzlement of this case, does not have the punishment of the above defendant, etc. shall be considered as favorable to the above defendant. Considering the above defendant's age, character, family relation, living environment, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions in the trial of this case, such as the above defendant's age, character and behavior, family relation, living environment, motive, means and result of the crime, etc., the punishment shall be determined as ordered by the order

Registration of Personal Information

Defendant A, B, C, and D are subject to registration of a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (where the conviction of Defendant A, B, and D is finalized, the above Defendants are 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 they are obligated to submit personal information to the competent authority pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act

Parts of innocence

"2017 Highly 291"

1. Summary of the facts charged

Defendant A and B, together from April 2013 to May 2013, 2013, had an auxiliary storage device (USB) in which the motion picture recorded as described in paragraph (1) was stored, and received KRW 10 million from 25,000,000,000 from the Plaintiff.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to provide the body of others who might cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a camera, with photographs taken against their will.

2. Determination

A. In light of Article 13(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 1156, Dec. 18, 2012) which was applied at the time of the instant crime, a person who distributes, sells, leases, or openly displays or displays the active substance to the public is punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding ten million won, and pursuant to Article 14(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 1156, Jun. 19, 2013) that was wholly revised on December 18, 2012, a person who “providing photographs” is also punished by imprisonment for not more than five years, or by a fine not exceeding ten million won. Therefore, this part of the facts charged is not subject to a separate punishment.

B. Furthermore, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court as to the date and time of the crime in this part of the facts charged, the Defendants’ act of setting up an auxiliary storage device with which the video was stored to employees in the AW Group as above seems not to be between April 2013 and May 2013, rather than between May 201 and May 5, 2012 as the date and time indicated in the facts charged.

1) On June 11, 2013, Defendant A made a statement on June 11, 2013, “Before Vietnam (2017 Gohap291, evidence record No. 1517)” (hereinafter “2017 Mahap291, evidence record No. 1572”), Defendant A made a statement that “B” was between November 1, 2012 and December 3, 2013 (hereinafter “2017 Mahap291, evidence record No. 1572, evidence record No. 1572), and “after the date of the crime,” Defendant A made a statement that “B was sent to the interested parties of the CW Group on April 6, 2012.” Defendant A made a statement that the victim’s sexual traffic video was sent twice to the interested parties of the CW Group (hereinafter “AW Group”) and continued to make a statement to the CW Group 201 Ma2752, evidence record No. 2752, and 451).

2) Defendant B stated that “AW Group’s related person is memoryed before the head of the 2012 son was satisfyed at the Western University on April 2012 to May 5, 2012” (Article 2752 of the Evidence No. 2011). Defendant B stated that “The accurate date is not memory but at the time and time of contact with AL.” (Article 2017 Gohap291 of the Evidence No. 2752 of this Court).

3) At the investigative agency around 2012, C also made a statement that Defendant A and B sent to Defendant A and B a mobile phone number and e-mail address, and Defendant A and B met AW Group-related persons (2017 Gohap291, steam records No. 2740).

4) AW group executives AK, who were contacted by the Defendants, did not accurately memory but received e-mail at the beginning of 2012 and received Handphone letters. After that, the said fact was reported to the AJ (2017 Gohap291, No. 2429 of the evidence record). At that time, AJ, who served as an auditor of AW company, sent e-mail from AK with regard to “PPPS video” and received the e-mail output from AK and then sent the e-mail output to the effect that the said e-mail was “at the time of contact with the Western University, there was only one thousands of 1 mets of 1)” (Article 2017 Gohap29 of the evidence record).

1"Evidence Records No. 2404 to 2409)

5) On May 18, 2012, BB(A) sent to C a note stating that “I will accept L/C in its original company and transaction details, money received, and photographic recording materials.” If we look at BB’s statement as above (2017Dahap2914, evidence No. 1371 of evidence records), the date on which the Defendants contacted AW Group appears to be between April 201 and May 2012.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, this part of the facts charged against Defendant A and B constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench to determine the innocence under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act and to publicly announce the summary of the part not guilty

The presiding judge shall be changed.

Judges Tae-young

Judicial Chief Judge;

1) According to Defendant C’s credit card use records, it can be confirmed that the payment was made twice in the name of the franchise store AX on February 25, 2013 (2017Dahap291, 334 evidence records, 774 pages)

2) Even if Defendant F’s assertion is deemed to have no benefit from acquiring the money by committing a crime of attack, insofar as an accomplice already acquired the money, the crime of attack against Defendant F is established as long as the accomplice acquired the money.

3) Defendant A et al. appears to have separately purchased the brush in the shape of the brush and the card bags that were either provided or purchased for the commission of the crime set forth in Paragraph 1 of the holding by Defendant A et al. (2017Dahap291, evidence No. 1379, 1380) after the seized vehicle key-shaped brush (2017Dahap291, evidence No. 1380);

4) This also applies to the case where Defendant A and B committed the instant crime from April 2012 to May 2012 as seen below.