The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request with respect to a prosecuted case against which the request for attachment order was filed, and the defendant appealed only against this, and thus, there is no benefit of appeal with respect to the case for which the attachment order was requested.

Therefore, Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, a legal fiction of appeal, does not apply (see Supreme Court Decisions 82Do2476, Dec. 14, 1982; 201Do6705, Aug. 25, 201; 201Do201, Aug. 25, 201). Thus, the claim for attachment order is excluded from the scope of the trial of this Court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The Defendant did not know of the attempted quasi-rape (A) at the time of committing the instant crime, that the victim did not have been unable to resist, and even if so, the Defendant did not know of such fact.

(B) As the Defendant believed that he would be able to confluent with the victim, there was no intention on the attempted quasi-rape.

(2) At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and was in a state of mental disability.

B. (1) The Defendant did not assault or assault the victim, and thought that he/she was inception with the victim, and thus did not have the intent to commit indecent act by compulsion.

(2) The Defendant’s act does not constitute “indecent act”.

3. Summary of the facts charged in the instant case and judgment of the lower court

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case (1) The Defendant is Seoul D public official who is the head of the former E Trade Union F branch, and the victim G (the age of 29) is a contractual employee employed as the deputy secretary-general of the above Trade Union F branch, and the Defendant and the victim worked in the same office.

On September 1, 201, the Defendant cannot know the date between September 1, 201 and October 10, the Defendant was seated next to the victim who was in charge of the work at the fifth floor F Branch Office in Seoul H, and was seated next to the victim.