가. 준 강제 추행 피고인은 2017. 3. 중순경 서울 강남구 B 아파트 C 호( 이하 ‘ 이 사건 아파트 ’라고 한다) 피고인의 주거지에서, 피해자 D( 여, 당시 28세) 이 조카들과 잠을 자고 있던 방 안으로 들어가, 그 곳에 누워 있는 피해자의 귓불과 목, 가슴 부위를 만졌다.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in a state of resistance.

B. From around 00:00 on March 22, 2017 to around 01:00, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim in a “F” singing room located underground of the Gangnam-gu Seoul E building, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. In that context, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force on the part of the victim in a manner that the victim’s side gate and buckbucks were sucked with the victim’s hand.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the conviction in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which leads to the judge to have a conviction that is beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the level to have such conviction, the determination ought to be made in the interests of the defendant even if he/she was suspected of guilt (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do15767, Feb. 13, 2014). (b) The defendant consistently denies the above facts charged from the investigative agency to the court, and there is no evidence that guarantees objectivity, in addition to the statement made by the defendant and the victim (hereinafter “offender”), and in light of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the records of this case, there is sufficient credibility and probative value to the statement made by the complainant as shown in the facts charged of this case, to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1) Each of the evidence presented by the prosecutor in the instant case is the police of the complainant, the prosecution, and the court.