The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (legal scenarios) is that the defendant was seated by the victim D (defluence, 20 years of age) in the subway room by fluor, hand, and again, the defendant's hand to examine the victim's hand, etc. in order to get out of the subway room is merely an act that causes fluority or displeasure in social norms, and objectively causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public, and cannot be seen as an act contrary to the good sexual moral sense, the court below convicted the defendant by misapprehending the legal principles on "indecent act" as stipulated in Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, thereby convicting the defendant.

2. Determination

A. Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that “a person who commits an indecent act on another person at any public means of transportation, place of public performance or assembly, or other densely concentrated place shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding three million won.” The legislative intent of the above provision is to cope with the occurrence of an indecent act in a public place entering the general public with population concentration in the urbanized modern society and the necessity of punishment therefor is higher than the past. On the other hand, the indecent act committed in a manner other than exercising force by using the victim’s explicit and active resistance or difficult circumstances due to such reasons as facilitating access with the victim and disclosing the place of indecent act, etc., thereby infringing on the victim’s sexual moral freedom, and thus establishing the subjective indecent act.