A. In relation to the crime committed on January 9, 2018, the Defendant did not have any marbry of the victim’s chest part, and in relation to the crime committed on January 11, 2018, the Defendant’s marcing of the victim was merely a part of the victim’s mar. As such, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant intentionally committed an indecent act against the victim.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty by erroneous finding the facts and sentenced the defendant guilty.

B. The lower court’s sentence (a fine of 5 million won, and 40 hours’ completion of a sexual assault treatment program) against the Defendant against the prosecutor (unfair form of punishment) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. “Indecent act” of the relevant legal doctrine as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is objectively an act that causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to good sexual morality, and thus infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it is so determined ought to be carefully determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship before the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner leading to the act, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual morality at the time, etc. Furthermore, it does not require any subjective motive or objective to stimulate, stimulate, and satisfy sexual desire as a subjective element necessary for the establishment of the crime of indecent act by compulsion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5856, Sept. 26, 2013). In addition, in light of the legal doctrine as seen earlier, the lower court should not dismiss the witness’s statements, including the victim, without any reasonable evidence to deem credibility, in view of the objective and consistent reasoning of the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012014Do1215.