At the latest 12:00, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim, one time by hand, referring to the part of the victim who kid from the first floor of the Mabro-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man-Man (E).

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion that they had no physical contact with the victim, and the act recorded in the facts charged does not constitute indecent act by compulsion.

3. Determination

A. Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “The recognition of a criminal fact shall reach the degree of proof with no reasonable doubt.”

Therefore, the conviction in a criminal trial should be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

In a case where the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone does not reach the degree of conviction, the determination should be made with the benefit of the defendant even if there is a suspicion of guilt.

(Supreme Court Decision 2016Do21231 Decided October 31, 2017). The only evidence to prove the indecent act described in the facts charged in this case is the victim’s statement.

In the case of sexual assault, the credibility of the statement concerning the fact of injury raised at risk of causing such inconvenience and inconvenience should not be rejected without permission in that the victim has to make a sexually numerical statement in the sexual assault case. However, if the victim's statement is the only evidence in determining whether there was a indecent act under the circumstance where it is normally difficult to expect that the act of indecent act was committed, the victim's statement is reasonable and reasonable, as well as objective circumstances and rule of experience in order to determine the defendant guilty on this basis.