The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. At around 18:50 on February 21, 2019, the Defendant, on the charge of the instant facts charged, closely adhered to the Defendant’s gender mort on the part of the Defendant’s morturine, which was operated from the high speed terminal station in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul to the seat of 188 and 9, to the seat of Kimpo Airport.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in the front car, which is a concentrated place with the public.

2. The burden of proof of the facts charged in a judgment in a criminal trial shall be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction shall be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

(2) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, etc. adopted and examined by this Court, it is difficult to deem that the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim as indicated in the instant facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act as indicated in the instant facts charged.

(1) According to the video images taken by the police officers in the front direction of the defendant (Evidence No. 12 of the evidence list submitted by the prosecutor), the fact that the defendant was in contact with the victim's body behind the victim, etc. may be recognized. However, even according to the above video, it is not clearly confirmed that the defendant's sexual organ was directly contacted with the body of the victim, such as the victim's sexual organ being closely sealed onto the victim's her sent.

② According to each statement of enforcement officers, the enforcement officers stated to the effect that the lower body of the Defendant was in contact with the victim’s her tam within the train. However, the enforcement officers at the time taken the Defendant’s tam with the cellular phone, and the situation of the previous car where passengers were concentrated.