beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year and six months, respectively.
However, as to the defendant B, this shall not apply.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On June 20, 2008, the Jeju High Court sentenced Defendant A to a suspended sentence of two years and six months for committing a violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (Juvenile Rape, etc.) at the Jeju High Court’s Jeju High Court’s Jeju High Court on June 20, 2008; on October 21, 2010, the Jeju District Court sentenced Defendant A to a suspended sentence of one year for murder preparation, etc.; and on July 14, 2011, the said judgment became final and conclusive, and the said suspended sentence became final and conclusive; and on June 6, 2013, the execution of each of the said punishment was completed in the Jeju District Court.
【The Defendant was aware of the Victim F (V, 19 years of age) who was working as an employee in the restaurant in the restaurant specialized in chickens in Jeju, while working as an employee at the restaurant in the restaurant.
1. Around 03:00 on January 6, 2014, the Defendant, at the G main store located in Jeju, had H drink and drinked with the victim, and with H, other employees of the said restaurant, she left the toilet with the victim.
The Defendant demanded that kis kis kis kisc, and even though the victim expressed his intention of refusal, kiscs kisc, kisc, brought about the Defendant’s kisc, brought about the Defendant’s kisc, bkisc, followed the victim’s kisc, and avoided the Defendant, followed the victim’s kisc, kiscing the victim’s kisc, and kisced the victim into the victim’s kisc, thereby committing an indecent act by force.
2. No person who violates the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection shall distribute information with a content that repeatedly leads to fear or apprehensions to other persons through information and communications networks;
Since then on the grounds of the act, etc. in paragraph 1, the defendant was in harmony on the ground that the victim was working in the same restaurant while the defendant was located in the same restaurant, and that he was not able to contact with the workplace fee and the wrong interest.