3. From 26. 01:00 up to 26. 01:00, “E” was proposed to take photographs of 19 gold content, exposed to the victim F (the age of 23) on the 19th underground floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan D D D Building, and the photographing work was conducted, and the victim T-in panty and brode only, “I Ra I Ra I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I Ha I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am we am we am we am we am we am.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim.

2. In a single criminal trial, the conviction should be based on evidence of probative value, which leads to the judge to confident that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach such a level of conviction, the determination should be made in the interests of the defendant even if he/she was suspected of guilt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do15767, Feb. 13, 2014). In the instant case, the Defendant consistently acknowledged that there was a certain sexual speech from an investigative agency, but argued that it was obtained the victim’s consent, and the Defendant did not commit an indecent act such as the facts charged. In addition to the victim’s statement, there was no direct evidence to acknowledge the facts charged, and thus, in order to determine the Defendant on the basis of the victim’s statement, which is the only evidence supporting the facts charged, the victim’s statement itself should be made in light of the victim’s feasibility and feasibility, objective circumstances, and empirical rule.