Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2. Determination

A. On May 17, 2016, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force on the part of the victim’s chest while talking about the victim E (the victim E, 42 years of age) and drinking at a “D” restaurant located in Daegu Suwon-gu around 01:40 on May 17, 2016.

B. The lower court determined as follows, based on each evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, found the following circumstances: (a) although the victim’s statement, which is directly evidence, differs from the CCTV images, the entire major contents of the statement are consistent; and (b) the victim filed a constructive false report, i.e., reporting the phone immediately after the instant case.

In particular, according to CCTV images before and after the instant case, it seems difficult to see that there was a situation that the victimized person would have raised a defense against the Defendant by the time when the images were cut off. However, on the grounds that the overall context of the above images and the victim’s report and the victim’s statement are consistent, the credibility of the victim’s statement is recognized.

(c)

The above circumstances acknowledged by the lower court, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the CCTV in this case appears to be a video recording method by reducing eco-friendly actions on the screen. However, the CCTV in this case appears to be unable to record the CCTV in entirety, such as from time to time when the middle is omitted, and some omission is likely to occur while the people move, and therefore, it cannot be concluded that there was no movement of people at the time of not video recording.