In full view of the facts that the Defendant, after the occurrence of the instant case, resigned from the hospital and sent a text message stating that he was unclaimed in the E’s cell phone, and that in the first floor CCTV image of the building in which the instant case occurred, it is confirmed that the Defendant was acting as a hand to E, there is credibility in the above statement of E.

Therefore, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed an indecent act by force as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by rendering a not guilty verdict of the facts charged in this case.

2. The lower court determined: (a) according to CCTV images taken by all of the circumstances at the places listed in the facts charged, the Defendant was seated in a stairs for a considerable time to shoulder alcohol.

It is not confirmed that E does not sit next to the facts charged, and it is not possible to have access to E except for a short-term motor vehicle that attempted to be dried by cutting off the part of E in front, and there is no way for E to resist the body contact of the defendant in the above space. ② In light of the overall attitude and behavior of the defendant and E, which appear in CCTV images, and the current situation, it seems that the defendant did not commit an indecent act like the facts charged. ③ The E’s statement that seems to correspond to the facts charged is considerably drunk at the time, ③ there was a little physical contact between E and the defendant outside the alley (eline) after leaving the place specified in the facts charged, and there was a claim for E as to it.

However, E is highly likely to depend on inaccurate memory in light of the fact that it is impossible to memory it.