Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On June 11, 2017, from around 17:32 to 17:34 of the same day, the Defendant: (a) from “D Park” located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Bupyeong-gu, Seoul to “D Park,” the victim E (the name, the age of 11) and snow are proneed; and (b) left the panty to the buck and panty bucks; and (c) left the panty.

In other words, I shown the victim.

As a result, the Defendant committed sexual abuse, such as sexual harassment, which makes a child feel sexual humiliation at the same time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing CCTV storage CDs;

1. Article 71 Subparag. 1-2 and Article 17 Subparag. 2 of the former Child Reinstatement Act (amended by Act No. 14925, Oct. 24, 2017; and enforced April 25, 2018); Article 245 of the Criminal Act (a public performance obscenity) concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 21 (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. Article 49 (1) 1 of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse against Children and Juveniles subject to Disclosure Order;

1. Article 50 (1) 1 of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse against Children subject to a notification order;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the Defendant was not likely to repeat the instant crime during the same repeated crime period, and that it is disadvantageous to denying the instant crime.

However, the Defendant appears to have complied with the instruction and supervision of the protection observation officer prior to the instant crime, and made considerable efforts to improve his character and conduct, and in light of the risk of such act or the severity of punishment, the Defendant failed to take the net desire during the period of repeated crime, thereby resulting in any contingent crime.

On the other hand, it is judged that the punishment of the defendant is harsh.

In addition, the police officer of one defendant is also the police officer of one defendant.