The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. When considering the following circumstances, the gist of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant F (hereinafter referred to as “victim”).

It is recognized that the indecent act was committed by maring the right her part.

(1) The injured party may consistently notify the circumstances leading up to the damage.

② If the victim resists the Defendant immediately after the damage, the Defendant also appeared to have a certain degree of “physical contact”.

(3) The possibility that the victim was able to commit an indecent act against the victim by not a man who was immediately next to the victim shall be less than the victim.

A defendant who committed an indecent act subsequent to the right of the victim;

It is correct to view it.

2. If the reasoning revealed by the lower court and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence examined in the lower court were combined, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim.

Convicence is difficult

The lower court’s determination is correct.

(1) At the time of damage, many passengers are already on board the train, and the entrance door of the E platform was opened, and many people including the victim and the defendant entered the platform.

Due to those who enter fast, existing passengers have moved narrow and tightly.

Since the victim was able to get back to the entrance of the victim by getting out of his body, and the group including the victim was delayed than the victim, the victim was able to get out of the same body, there were many moves around the victim.

(2) Subsequent to the victim immediately before the victim resists the defendant, two male persons were in the same direction as the victim.

They were in close vicinity to the victim when they were unable to see their body to enter the electric dynamics and to the entrance.

On the other hand, because the defendant was moving into the dynamics, it was only the opposite direction with the victim.

Then, the victim.