2. According to the reasoning of the judgment, the defendant appears to have been under physical contact while walking along the side of the victim's right at the time and place stated in the facts charged. However, even though there were many victims at the time, there was no witness of an indecent act by the defendant, and the victim was only in charge of the defendant's left hand. The defendant seems to have been under high possibility of putting the victim on his left hand (According to the records, according to the defendant's testimony, it seems to have first left the front side of the mother building. According to the witness's testimony, according to the victim's testimony, it is highly probable that the defendant used the victim's left hand in the direction of viewing the victim, and there was no possibility that the defendant might have been under the influence of alcohol, and considering the fact that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol, the defendant's physical contact with the witness of this case cannot be ruled out to the extent that there was no reasonable suspicion of the defendant's physical contact with the witness of this case.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment is publicly announced pursuant to Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.