beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment of one year and two months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and one year.
Defendant
A Evidence of seizure from A.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
To the extent that the facts charged in the indictment do not disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, some amendments were made according to the facts obtained through the examination of evidence.
The Defendants, on July 1, 2014, were introduced by I, a director of the club known to the general public, with the introduction of the first three persons, such as the victim J, etc., who were first aware of the victim, and were drinking together with the victim on several occasions after having come to know of the victim.
At the time, Defendant A was an advertising model, but there was no certain revenue, but Defendant B had no long-term activity, and the cost already incurred to the entertainment planning company affiliated with the entertainment planning company is not allocated as much as the cost already incurred in the production cost and the business promotion expense, etc. compared with the revenue, and thus, it was an economic difficult situation, such as living the table table of a club.
As above, the Defendants showed interest in the victim as a sexual intercourse with the victim, and if the victim requests the victim to provide economic support, such as house and money in return for the sexual intercourse, etc., the victim may respond to the request. If the victim refuses to comply with the request, on July 3, 2014, the Defendants thought that even if Defendant B requests a large amount of money and valuables from the screen pictures taken by the victim after drinking together with the victim at the home of Defendant A located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, the victim would not refuse to comply with the request.
Accordingly, around August 14, 2014, Defendant A, at its home, tried to send a Kakao Stockholm message to the effect that “herman is only,” and to arrange the relationship between the victim and the victim’s “herman,” even though the victim had expressed an intent to provide economic support bypassing the victim’s home.
Then, the Defendants are the Defendants.