성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인위계등추행)
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
1. Around December 4, 2019, the Defendant committed an indecent act, such as: (a) the victim E, a disabled person of Grade II, who was parked in the C parking lot located in Chungcheongnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as “the victim”) with the disability of Grade II, who is a passenger, by pushing the victim E, in his/her hand; (b) the victim’s upper part of the victim’s upper part and the brode; (c) the victim’s upper part and the brode were tight; and (d) the victim’s chest was boomed with his/her chest; and (e) the victim’s panty part was fluened with his/her panty; and (e) the victim’s part was fluent.
Accordingly, the Defendant committed indecent act against the victim with physical disability by force.
2. Determination:
A. The summary of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion is the date and time stated in the facts charged in the instant case, and the fact that the Defendant temporarily stops the taxi that the Defendant drives and divided into E and dialogues, but there was no indecent act as described in the facts charged in the instant case.
B. Determination 1) In a criminal trial on related legal principles, the recognition of a criminal fact ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value that makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to such conviction, even if the defendant’s assertion or defense is contradictory or uncomfortable, it should be determined in the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201; 2012Do3722, Sept. 26, 2013). In order for the defendant to consistently deny the facts charged and to acknowledge a conviction only by the victim’s statement because there is no direct evidence to acknowledge the facts charged, the defendant’s assertion that the facts charged are true enough to have a reasonable doubt in light of the victim’s objective circumstances and empirical rule as well as the feasibility of the statement itself.