2. The victim’s investigative agency, legal statement, and CCTV images are admissible as evidence for the facts charged in the instant case.

The victim stated in the investigative agency and this court that “I would like to calculate the accident of Mat,” but the Defendant, after the victim, stated that “from the part with her upper strings, such as the victim’s upper strings, to the part below the lower part.”

그러나 CCTV 영상에 의하면, 피해자가 무를 사고 출입문을 나가려고 하자 입구에 서 있던 피고인이 옆으로 비켜서면서 피해자를 한번 툭 치는 장면이 나올 뿐이고, 피고인이 피해자의 등부터 엉덩이 까지 쓸어내리는 장면은 없다.

The statement of the victim seems to be considerably inconsistent with the objective facts of the above video and to have been distorted.

또 한 피고인은 수사기관에서부터 일관되게 비키라는 의미로 한번 툭 친 것일 뿐이고 추행의 의도가 없었다고

The part of the above Maart's entrance is narrow so that the defendant is flick by the defect about which the victim intends to go, and according to the above image, the victim's body was flick by the defendant's body towards the defendant, so it seems highly probable that the part in the defendant's contact was part of the victim's arms. Even if it is not so, the part in which the defendant used or contacted from the victim's et al. to the am cannot be seen as part of the victim's arms. The victim is likely to make an exaggerated statement about the defendant's behavior, the victim filed a report with 112 at the time, and the report of this case is written in the report processing list.