Judgment

1. The crime of indecent act by compulsion is established when the other party commits an indecent act after making it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation against the other party. Whether the assault or intimidation was sufficient to resist the other party shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the content and degree of assault and intimidation, circumstances leading to the exercise of tangible force, relationship with the victim, and circumstances at the time of the indecent act and the latter.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5979 Decided January 25, 2007). However, even if examining all the evidence adopted and investigated by this court, such as the victim’s court’s statement and investigation agency’s statement, it is not recognized that the Defendant committed assault or intimidation to the extent that it would make it difficult to resist the victim.

2. Meanwhile, in the case of indecent act by force, not only an indecent act by force against the other party making it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation, but also an indecent act by force includes the case in which the act of assault itself is recognized as an indecent act. In this case, as long as the assault does not necessarily require the degree of suppressing the other party’s intent and the exercise of force against the other party’s will is against the other party’s will, regardless of its force’s b

(대법원 2002. 4. 26. 선고 2001도2417 판결 참조). 다만 여기서 폭행행위 자체가 추행행위라고 인정되는 경우는 피해자가 가해자의 추행의도를 알아챌 겨를 없이 이루어지는 이른바 ‘기습추행’을 뜻하는 것으로 봄이 타당하다.

The defendant is against the victim.