The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

항소 이유의 요지( 사실 오인 법리 오해) 피해자는 범인으로 부터 추행을 당한 후 깜짝 놀라 그 자리에서 서 있다가 범인을 따라갔다고 진술하였는데, 당시 CCTV 영상에는 피고인이 피해자의 뒤쪽에서 걷고 있는 모습이 나타나 있으므로 인상 착의 등을 이유로 피고인을 범인으로 지목한 피해자의 진술을 믿을 수 없다.

Judgment

Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "The recognition of facts constituting a crime should be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt."

“.......”

Therefore, the conviction in a criminal trial should be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

In a case where the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone does not reach such a degree that would lead to conviction, it should be determined with the benefit of the defendant even if the defendant was suspected of guilt (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do21231, Oct. 31, 2017). The lower court consistently states that the victim’s appearance (which was not written in the color hat, was incurred in the future, and subsequently incurred lease) of the offender was consistently stated. Such appearance is less likely to cause confusion, and only the defendant among the subway passengers as shown in CCTV at the time, was in full consistent with the aforementioned appearance, and thus, the defendant committed an indecent act.

The decision was determined.

In that sense, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the victim consistently stated from the police to the court of the court below that "the defendant who was later at the time of leaving a subway her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her while leaving the subway, the victim her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers her