강제추행
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. Around 00:00 on July 31, 2018, the Defendant: (a) placed the complainants under the influence of alcohol in the residence of the complainant C (hereinafter referred to as the “Appellant”), who was under the influence of alcohol; (b) placed the complainants under the influence of alcohol; and (c) committed an indecent act by force against the Defendant’s grandchildren by putting them under the bottom of the Appellants, putting them up, and putting them up under the influence of the Appellants.
2. Determination
A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes a judge not having reasonable doubt as to whether the facts charged are true. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the suspect is suspected of guilt even in the absence of such evidence.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633 Decided November 11, 2010, etc.). B.
The direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case is only a statement by the complainant and the investigative agency.
As consistent from the police investigation stage to this court, the Defendant, while putting head into a toilet transition machine at the time of the instant case, and putting it on a room by setting up a sprink and laying down. However, the Defendant denied the charges to the effect that the Defendant did not sprink the spons the body of the sponsor, or spons the sponsor after the sponsor’s back from the sponsor, thereby making the sponsor of the sponsor and sponsing the sponsor’s chest.
In such a case, in order to find guilty of the facts charged on the basis of the statement of the complainant, it is required to have high probative value to the extent that there is little room for doubt about the truth and accuracy of the statement.
However, considering the following circumstances, it is deemed that the complainant's statement has probative value.