가. 피고인은 2013. 4. 말 일자불상 11:30경 서울 강남구 C빌딩 뒤편 쓰레기 분리수거장에서, 분리수거 중인 피해자 D(여, 48세)의 뒤로 다가가 손바닥으로 피해자의 엉덩이를 2회 툭 치는 방법으로 만져 피해자를 강제로 추행하였다.

나. 피고인은 2013. 5. 21. 11:30경 위 강남구 C빌딩 1층 남녀공용 화장실에서, 양치 중인 위 피해자의 뒤에서 손으로 피해자의 엉덩이를 2회 툭 치고, 이에 피해자가 “아저씨 이러시면 안돼요”라고 소리치자 재차 손으로 피해자의 허벅지를 1회 툭 치며 “그럼 이건 되고 ”라고 말하여 피해자를 강제로 추행하였다.

2. Evidence conforming to the above facts charged is the victim's statement and E's statement.

E’s statement is merely a transfer of the fact of damage from the victim, and the direct evidence to prove the above facts charged is the victim’s statement.

However, the victim's statement is the victim's statement.

In light of the fact that there is no consistency in the timing of the indecent act by compulsion, the fact that the victim transferred the damaged fact, etc., the victim’s statement is inconsistent with the E, and the victim’s statement attitude in the court, etc., it is difficult to believe.

In addition, it is difficult to recognize facts charged only with other evidence submitted by the prosecution.

Therefore, since each of the above facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.