2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant and his defense counsel took a front-time vehicle and tried to take a front-time vehicle in the future, but does not intentionally commit an indecent act on the part of the victim, although it is small in the future.

B. Determination 1) In a criminal trial, criminal facts ought to be established based on strict evidence with probative value that leads a judge to a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that it leads to such conviction, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201). 2) As evidence that corresponds to the facts charged in this case is evidence, there are witnesses F and E’s legal statements, police statements against victims E, criminal records, images, and video CDs.

3) According to each image of the video CD and criminal photograph taken by the situation at the time, mentmen, who suffered a wave wave and go back to approximately two minutes around the subway station platform No. 4 of subway 4, and mentmen, who waits for a door door from the back of the victim (0:00-03:07), followed by the back of the victim of this heat, when the electric car arrives and the safety door (hereinafter “one screen light”) arrives and goes back to the right side of the victim of this heat, and he gets aboard (03:07-03:43) in the direction of the victim’s right side, (03:41-03:46, and (46) in the direction of the victim’s right side, and after the fact that the Defendant took part in the 1-1 platform or the part of the victim’s hand, the Defendant took part in the part of the victim’s hand.