The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of reversal ex officio

A. The court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, although the Defendant’s act, such as the facts charged in the instant case, is merely limited to the degree of sexual harassment and cannot be seen as an indecent act by force.

B. (1) The offense of indecent act by compulsion includes not only the case of indecent act after the other party makes it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation, but also the case where the assault itself is recognized as an indecent act, and the assault in this case is not necessarily necessary to suppress the other party’s will.

An indecent act means an act that causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to good sexual moral sense, which infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom, and whether it is so determined shall be determined prudent by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the offender and the victim prior to the occurrence of the act, circumstances leading to the act, specific form of act, objective situation surrounding the act, sexual morality, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do6980 Decided September 10, 2015, etc.) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, means that the defendant, as stated in the instant facts charged, she takes the head of the victim while drinking alcohol together with the victim, and "the victim seems to have come to have come to have been sexually interest." The defendant, as stated in the instant facts charged, notified the victim that he/she was sexually interested, notified the victim of the fact that he/she was sexually interested, the victim was refused, and the victim was seated on the spot and tried to go to go out of the scene, and again, said, the defendant exercised the type of force that infringes on the victim's freedom to sexual self-determination, and the defendant was at the time.