beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows: (a) on December 1, 2016, around 11:50, the Defendant: (b) placed the victim F (or 19 years of age) who works in the above restaurant and works as an employee on the left side and right side on the table, and sits in E on the right side; and (c) placed the victim F (or 19 years of age) on the part of the Defendant’s order on the part of the said restaurant.
“The victim’s left side macks the right hand of the Defendant at the right hand, and the victim’s indecent act was forced by force, with three times his macks and macks on the right hand of the Defendant.
2. According to the evidence adopted and examined by this court, the victim did not directly identify the defendant as a criminal who committed an indecent act against himself/herself, but the victim made a statement to the effect that he/she was aware that he/she was subjected to an indecent act by hearing the table table of the criminal, or the view that he/she was a criminal, after committing an indecent act. However, there is no evidence that other person than the victim appeared to witness the scene of the indecent act.
In the instant facts charged (round 11:50 on December 1, 2016), four persons seated in a window in C golf club and a second-story restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) of the instant facts charged (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).
It is recognized that he/she was aware that he/she committed an indecent act against himself/herself by a person who ordered three malb covered by sea booms by sitting at the left seat of the victim who was in order to get the order at the time of his/her driving.
In other words, it is essential that there is no evidence that the victim was sexual indecent act while knowing about December 1, 2016.
The first report was made to the police with the content of “Abrupt that may be reported,” and the date and time of the instant facts charged (i.e., the time when the victim was sexually indecent during the order) was stated by the investigative agency to be around 11:50 on December 1, 2016 from the investigation agency to the instant court, and as regards the reasons why the time when the victim was sexually sexually indecent, this was specified in this court’s investigation agency.