A. In the process of moving to another employee, the Defendant was merely involved in the victim’s head, and did not commit an indecent act against the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (five million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor indicted the Defendant that “the Defendant committed an indecent act in such a way as to use the victim’s head continuously,” on the ground that “the Defendant’s buckbucks against the employees of the club, and continued to commit an indecent act in such a way as to use the victim’s head.” Accordingly, the Defendant asserted to the effect that “Although bucks, in the course of protesting against the victim, the bucks can be contacted with the victim’s bucks, it cannot be viewed as an indecent act, but it cannot be viewed as an indecent act, and only was the victim’s head in the course of moving the victim to other employees of the victim’s head.”

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of committing an indecent act by deceiving the victim’s head and committing an indecent act, but determined that the victim reversed the previous statement in the lower court’s court, and that other evidence alone cannot be recognized.

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the records of this case, the contents of the victim's statement are reliable, and if the results of CCTV verification were to be seen, it is sufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant committed an indecent act by deceiving the head of the victim, so the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

① 피해자는 경찰 수사당시 ‘영업 마감을 위해 테이블을 치우는데 누군가 허벅지를 만지는 느낌이 났고, 놀라서 그 남자(피고인)에게 항의하였더니 머리를 쓰다듬고 갔다’는 취지로 진술하였고, 이후 검찰 수사과정에서 화질이 개선된 CCTV 영상을 확인하고 '허벅지 쪽에 손이 닿는 느낌이 와서 눈을 동그랗게 뜨고 피고인을 쳐다보았는데 피고인이 머리를...