logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.07.26 2018고합51
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강제추행)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 80 hours.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

When female students get out of school, the defendant used to use urban buses to commit an indecent act against female students in booms in urban buses.

1. On October 10, 2017, the Defendant: (a) started at the E-stop station located in Seongbuk-gu, Changwon-si; (b) around October 10, 2017, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the Defendant’s sexual organ on the part of his/her part, such as the victim G (V, 16 years old) who is a child or juvenile on a bus located in the F bus in the direction of advanced navigation; and (c) committed an indecent act by force against the Defendant’s sexual organ on the part of his/her part.

2. On October 17, 2017, the Defendant started at the E-stop place located in Changwon-si D around 18:00 on October 17, 2017, and committed an indecent act against the victims of the Defendant’s sexual organ, following the victim G, etc. described in paragraph (1), who was a child or juvenile on the bus in the F-si in the direction of Jindo, in the direction of Jindo., the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victims of the Defendant’s sexual organ by forcing the victims of his sexual organ on the part of his her son (n, 17 years old).

In this part of the facts charged, after the victim G et al., the prosecutor forced the victims of the defendant's sexual organ to do her her her her her her her her his her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her

“Although the statement and evidence submitted by the victims in an investigative agency, this part of the statement is obvious that it is a clerical error and it is deemed that the change in the order of crime would not obstruct the exercise of the defendant’s right of defense, so it shall be corrected accordingly.

Summary of Evidence

1..

arrow