이 연구에서는 단일 산란이론을 이용하여 경상분지에서 얻어진 국소 미소지진의 자료를 1.5-1.8Hz 사이의 주파수 영역에서 몇 개의 구간으로 나누어 대역 통과 필터링을 g여 coda 파의 진폭 감쇠로부터 Q값을 결정하였다 Coda Q 값은 Qc=Q0 fn 형태의 주파수 의존 양상을 보여주며 Q0 값은 83.9-155.9 n 값은 0.76에서 1.05 사이로 나타났다 산란 감쇠와 고유감쇠를 고려하여 감쇠가 순전히 산란에 의해서만 일어난다고 가정했을 때 최소 평균 자유경로를 51.-56km 이고 비탄성 감쇠계수는 0.0093-0.0098 로 나타났다 진앙과 관측소간의 경로가 단층지역을 지나는 것이 다른 경로를 지나오는 것보다 높은 감쇠와 강한 주파수 의존성을 보여준다.

In a sex offender ecosystem, it is necessary to ensure that rape is applied only to violent breaches of at least sexual self-determination. However, it is doubtful that the Supreme Court may have too broad a range of rape cases in this case. On the contrary, The first and second trial courts seem to be wary of further rape charges. On the basis of this case, it is likely to be the type that corresponds to the sexual compel in the German criminal law. So it would be more appropriate to introduce and punish the sexual compel in legislation if consensus was formed on the need to punish people for forcing sexual behavior. That would also eliminate the need to stretch and punish rape charges. The Supreme Court calls the degree of rape and intimidation the most serious offense and threat. But, it seems that the comprehensive judgment system applies the standards of violence and intimidation of consultation. However, such a comprehensive judgment does not provide a clear standard. Therefore, in this case, the Supreme Court made a different judgment from the first and second trials. However, the main reason why it is difficult to consistently punish sex crimes is because there is a big problem with the current sex criminal law system. As the wrong legal system is filled with diverse legal interpretations, the burden is entirely on citizens. Therefore, it is inevitable that there continue to be disturbance in the ecosystem of sex crimes. The preferred way to fix this mess is for lawmakers to fix the current sex crime system. And the court should try to help citizens form a proper consciousness of norms on sex crimes through a consistent and clear application of the law.

Anyone who defames another by publicly alleging facts can be punished, even though the facts are true. Because In korean criminal law there are the article, “A person who defames another by publicly alleging facts shall be punished by imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not more than two years or by a fine not exceeding five million won(Art. 307 (1))”. Furthermore, “A person who defames another by publicly alleging false facts shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years, suspension of qualifications for not more than ten years, or a fine not exceeding ten million won(Art. 307 (2))”. But If the facts alleged under Article 307 (1) are true and solely for the public interest, the act shall not be punishable(Art. 310). However, there is no rule about the unsettled facts(It’s not sure whether the publicly alleging facts is true or false). In practice, this cases are applied to Art. 307 (2). And the practice deal with the unsettled facts in the field of a mistake of face. But in Art. 307 (2) the “fale facts” is a element of a crime, so that the unsettled facts should be applied not to Art. 307 (2), but Art. 307 (1). Otherwise, the unsettled facts can make misunderstand to the public by the guilty or not guilty of a judge. Because if the judge found the defendant guilty, then the unsetlled fact turn to be a true fact in spite of not proving of the fact. But if the judge found the defendant not guilty, then the unsettled fact turn to be a false fact. Therefore, if a judge can not prove the truth of the unsettled fact, then the Art. 307 (1) must be applied.

In Online-Rollenspielen ist es schon längst Normalität, dass besonders wertvolle und seltene Gegenstände, Rüstungsteile oder Waffen für reales Geld auf Handelsportalen wie Itembay verkauft werden. Nach der Nutzungsbediengungen haben Games Firmen gegen diese Praxis vorgegangen. Spieler, die in der Realität mit In-Game-Gegenständen handeln, müssten damit rechnen, alle Charaktere und Zugänge zu verlieren. Auch die Accounts von Käufern würden zeitweise deaktiviert und die betreffenden Objekte gelöscht. Ein Verhalten, dass man Items für reales Geld auf Handelsporalen handelt, war damit bisher nach dem betroffenen Gesetz, “Act on Promotion of Game Industry” nicht nur als illegal betrachtet, sondern auch der Handler des Items als bestraftet. Es war dennoch immer noch erlaubt gesetzlich, nicht via Handelnspotalen privat mit In-Game-Gegenständen zu handeln.Aber das höchst Gericht in Korea entscheidet dass das Verhalten sei frei, dass der Handler des Items mit Game-Items handeln lässt. Dies Urteil war eine sensationelle Entscheidung in der Game Industrie, dennoch könnte die Überlegung zum betroffenen Gesetz und Game-Items nicht ausreichend sein, wenn man den Inhalt des Urteils überprüft hat. Weil es keine zusätzlichen Begründungen für erste Instanz sowie Berufungsgericht gab. Vor allem beschäftigte sich der Berufungsgericht auf die Zufällichkeit des Leneage-Game, so wurde es übergesehen, ob das Leneage ein Grücksiel ist oder nicht. Das heisst, sind nicht nur die Zufällichkeit im Online-Games ein Schlüsselpunkt, sondern auch die Möglichkeit des Glückspiels. Deswegen wurden die Entscheidung der Gerichte(der ersten Intanz, der Berufungsgericht und das höchst Gericht) in der vorhanden Arbeit kritisch beleuchtet.