1. Determination made in a judgment by a higher court shall bind lower courts with respect to the pertinent case (Article 8 of the Court Organization Act), and the same shall also apply to de facto judgment that served as the ground for reversal of the judgment of appeal.

Therefore, the court of final appeal, which received a case from the court of final appeal, is based on the judgment, unless there is a change in the relationship between evidence and evidence that served as the basis of prompt judgment, in the course of examining the factual and legal judgment rendered by the court of final appeal on the grounds of reversal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do3976, Mar. 25, 2005; 2008Do10572, Apr. 9, 2009). 2. The records reveal the following facts.

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that “The Defendant, from around 13:00 on December 10, 201 to 30 minutes, committed an indecent act by force against the victim (the victim, 30 years of age) while giving physical treatment to the victim (the victim, her age 30) at the physical treatment room of the instant hospital.”

B. (1) The judgment of the court of first instance was found guilty, and (2) The court below prior to the remand found that ① since physical therapy room, which is the place of crime, is not wide and relatively open space, there were several persons such as hospital employees and patients, etc. in the space, it is not easy for the defendant to commit an indecent act as described in the facts charged. Moreover, even to the witness L/K, which is the defendant's workplace, as well as the patient who was treated by the above hospital, as well as the witnessO of the court of original instance, the patient who was treated by the above hospital, as well as the witness L/K, which was located in the above physical therapy room, there were several employees and patients in the above physical therapy room at the time of the instant case, and the victim stated a field situation at the time of the instant case to the effect that it was difficult to do the same or it was difficult to occur. Accordingly, the court below acknowledged that the victim had a question about the credibility of the statement made by the investigative agency and the court of first instance.