Whether the act of making a minor in employment with his customer constitutes an act under Article 4(3) of the Minor Protection Act (negative)

In light of the legislative intent of the Act on the Protection of Minors, a business act that disturbs public morals, such as sexual morality, etc. of minors in employment status constitutes "business act" under the above provision. Thus, the provision of "for minors" shall be deemed to refer to minors who are the other party to the business act, and therefore, the above provision shall be deemed to prohibit minors from doing the above business act.

Articles 4 and 6 of the Minor Protection Act

[Plaintiff, Appellant] 82Do701 decided Sep. 14, 1982 (Article 4(1) of the Specialized Minor Protection Act (Article 4(1) of the Special Self-Governing Minor Protection Act, No. 3030, No. 6918)

Defendant 1 and three others

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months, by imprisonment for a maximum term of two years and by imprisonment for a short term of one year and six months, respectively.

One hundred-five days each of the detention days prior to the imposition of judgment shall be included in the defendants' respective penalty.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of the above punishment against Defendant 1 shall be suspended.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, Defendant 1, at around September 27, 1987 (trade name omitted) around 02:0, had Nonindicted 3 attacked with his name and deceased person of the age of 42, and had the minors do business that disturbs public morals, such as sexual morality, etc.

Defendant 1 is a person who runs the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seaeng omitted) main points. Defendant 2 is a pilot of Defendant 1. Defendant 3 and Defendant 4 is a relative of Defendant 2. Defendant 1 instructs Defendant 2, his natives, and Defendant 3, 4, etc., who are his natives, to attract a minor female for the purpose of using them as a entertainment loan by attracting female to his main points of view, and instruct Defendant 2, his natives, and his natives, to attract them to enter the minor female, and bear their accommodation and entertainment expenses. Defendant 2, etc., by inducing female students from his neighboring places of view to the university, following each resolution to attract them to the above main entertainment loan.

1. Defendant 2, 3, and 4

A. In collusion with Nonindicted 2

On September 23, 1987, at the Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-dong University, Jongno-gu, Jongno-gu, Seoul. At around 22:00, the victim Non-Indicted 1 (the victim Non-Indicted 1, the 18-year old), and Non-Indicted 3 (the 19-year old age), the defendant 4 and Non-Indicted 2 have access to his women and "if there is time", they are harsh that "me or defect if there is time", they provide them with meals by moving them to the 463-year old-dong 463-dong 463-dong, Dobong-gu, the 169-56 Simnam-dong, the provisional lodging of the defendant, etc. at around 10:0 on September 24, 1987.

B. In collusion with Nonindicted 4 and 2

At around 27.23:30 of the same month, Jongno-ro 3 found the victim, non-indicted 5 (the victim, non-indicted 6 (the 17 years old, the 18 years old), non-indicted 7 (the 18 years old, the 18 years old), and the non-indicted 4 approaching the female, who is a university student and has no partnership. The male-gu's children are now playing together, and they agreed to do so. At around 28.02:00 of the same month, he provided the labac culture and provided the meals with the labac culture and let the female do diving at the above Youngnam-ro at around 28.02:00 of the same month, he entices the female for the purpose of profit-making by transferring the (trade name omitted) point operated by Defendant 1 to the (trade omitted) point in around 10:00 on that day.

C. In collusion with Nonindicted 2

On February 20, 10.20:00, Defendant 2 sent a phone to the victim Nonindicted 8 (Y, 19 years old) who became aware of at least the 19th university in Jung-gu, Seoul as of the day before Defendant 2’s previous university, and had the victim 8 (Y, 19 years old) play play; by inducing the above method, she moved to the above sea-bagm crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym cryp, Dobong-gu, 17:00 of that month; and then, at around March 17:00 of that month, she entices a female for profit

D. In collusion with Nonindicted 2:

On the other hand, at around 9.28.10:00, Nonindicted 5 and Nonindicted 6, who had inducedd as referred to in the above paragraph (b) of the same paragraph, threatened that “the persons who are able to abide by the mouths of Man-Mada, die and are not responsible”, forced them to write a written self-defense, which is not a minor, alternate surveillance, etc., by October 11:00 of the same year; and

2. Defendant 4

A. At around 9.29.02:00 in that year, the victim non-indicted 5, who was detained in the kitchen (trade name omitted), was sexually raped on one occasion by having the victim non-indicted 5, who was placed in prison at (trade name omitted, exceeded clothes, or otherwise was unsatisfed."

B. At around 9.30.15:00 of that year, the victim non-indicted 5, who was detained in the new branch of the New branch of the Jung-gu Seoul Central Bank of Korea, Jung-gu, Seoul, had been detained without not more than 400,000 won, and had the victim non-indicted 5, who said that he would cause bodily harm, and had the victim 1,00,000 won (hereinafter referred to as "the victim's non-indicted 5,000

3. Defendant 3:

At around 9.29.22:00, the victim non-indicted 6, who was detained in the above (trade name omitted), was frightened in the same manner as in the preceding paragraph, and was frighten out of clothes on his own, and rape with sexual intercourse once;

4. Defendant 1:

On September 27, 9.27, at the (trade name omitted), Nonindicted 3 and Nonindicted 1, etc., who were minors, knew that they would drink with their customers on their names, provided them with alcohol to minors.

Each fact in the ruling,

1. Defendants’ respective statements in compliance with this Court.

1. Each protocol of interrogation of the Defendants prepared by the public prosecutor and each protocol of statement of Nonindicted 8 and 5 that correspond to these statements

1. Each statement written by Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 in preparation of a judicial police assistant, corresponding to the statements

1. Each statement prepared by Nonindicted 5, 8, and 11 and the statement corresponding thereto among the statements prepared by Nonindicted 5, 8, and 11

As a whole, there is evidence that can be recognized.

Each profit-making inducement act is a violation of Article 288(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 2(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Article 276(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 297 of the Criminal Act; Article 350(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 6(1) and Article 4(1) of the Protection of Minors Act; Article 6(2) of the Protection of Minors Act; Article 6(1) of the Protection of Minors Act; Article 6(1) of the same Act provides that a person who commits rape shall be punished under Article 37(1) of the same Act; Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the same Act; Article 38(1) of the same Act provides that a person shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a limited period of 6 years; Article 4(1) of the same Act provides that a person who commits rape shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a limited period of 3 years; Article 5(2) of the same Act provides that person who committed the most severe punishment for the defendant 2.

Of the facts charged against Defendant 1, the part that Nonindicted 3 (the age of 19) who had already been induced at the main point of Defendant’s management around September 27, 1987 (trade name omitted) stated in the facts charged that Defendant 1 carried out a business act that disturbs public morals, such as sexual morality, against a minor by leading him to his name and weak amount of age 42 (the age of 19). Article 4(3) of the Minor Protection Act prohibits a minor from doing a business act that disturbs public morals, such as sexual morality, at a place specified in Article 2(1)4 of the same Act, and is punished pursuant to Article 6(2) of the same Act. Since the Act was enacted for the purpose of protecting the health of minors and fostering them, it is merely for punishing minors, and it does not mean that it constitutes “the above-mentioned business act of minors,” and it does not mean that it constitutes “the above-mentioned business act of minors,” under Article 8(2)1 of the same Act, and thus, constitutes “the above-mentioned business behavior of minors.”

Therefore, it cannot be said that allowing Nonindicted 3, a minor, who is the above defendant's employment status (any reason) like the above facts charged, to conduct the above business act is subject to punishment under Articles 4 (3) and 6 (2) of the Minor Protection Act, and this part of the facts charged does not constitute the elements of crime, and thus, it is not guilty of this part of the facts charged pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Gangnam-gu (Presiding Judge)