준강제추행
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On February 20, 2015, the summary of the facts charged found that the Defendant, at the Defendant’s house located in Yongsan-si, 315 dong 1806, 315 and 1806, had sexual intercourse after entering the house under the name of “nick-si Meet,” and that the Victim G (Y, 18 years old) was dead, but was refused, committed an indecent act on the part of the victim by forcing the victim to resist his body, such as his arms and legs.
2. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant and his defense counsel do not commit an indecent act on G, such as the facts charged, although they are shaking the G's bridge to communicate with the G that the defendant locked.
3. According to the reasoning of the judgment, the police statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement of the original statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement of the defendant is inadmissible and it is not admissible. According to the mobile phone text message (the contents of the defendant sent to the victim), investigation report (the previous report) and summary order statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement statement of the defendant sent to G on February 19, 2015, the preceding day of the case of this case. The defendant was punished as committing an indecent act of the 18 years old and 19 years old, even around 2012, but it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant committed an indecent act as shown in the facts charged, and it is not sufficient to acknowledge it differently, it is eventually ordered to be acquitted by the summary of the judgment as ordered under Article 58 (2).