Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant and the victim B (a person, a man, 34 years old) have visited the D cafeteria located in Kimpo-si C as each customer.

On February 23, 2019, the Defendant: (a) around 20:00 on February 23, 2019, the victim’s amblock, which he wanted to sit in front of the lower table of the instant D restaurant, was cut off several times by her hand.

Accordingly, the defendant committed indecent acts by force against the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (the second trial date);

1. The written statement made by the police against B;

1. Application of CCTV-faging statutes;

1. Article 298 of the Criminal Act and Article 298 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed;

1. In full view of the following circumstances: Article 47(1) and the proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Exempted from an order to disclose or notify information; Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (see, e.g., the Defendant’s age, social ties, risk of repeating a crime; benefits and preventive effects expected from an order to disclose or notify registered information to the Defendant; and disadvantages and side effects

1. Article 56 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, Article 2 of the Addenda to Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018), the main sentence of Article 59-3 (1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is not good, and the fact that the victim wants to punish the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant, or that the defendant recognized the facts charged at the second trial date and reflects the facts charged, and that there is no record of punishment exceeding the punishment or fine for the same kind of crime.