Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Part of the facts charged in the indictment was revised according to the facts obtained through the examination of evidence without the amendment process to indictment to the extent that it does not disadvantage the defendant's defense right.

On June 9, 2018, at around 02:45, the Defendant committed an indecent act against a female victim under the influence of alcohol on the front side of the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C”, by finding out that the female victim under the name was under the influence of alcohol and was in a breathing the victim’s body, and by saving the victim’s back with his arms, thereby making it difficult for the Defendant to resist.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Statements made by witnesses E in the fourth trial records;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Determination as to the CD Defendant and defense counsel’s assertion

1. The summary of the assertion is that the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, laid down the arms of the victim, did not contain any fact that the Defendant had sold them after the victim et al. and did not intend to commit an indecent act.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence admitted as evidence of guilt prior to the determination, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in a state of failing to resist as stated in its reasoning is not acceptable.

E witnessed the present situation from the investigative agency to the present court, and consistently made a concrete and consistent statement that “the defendant was at the front of the convenience store at the time and was seated in the back of the victim, etc.”

In full view of the fact that E without any relationship with the Defendant is difficult to find any special motive or reason to gather the Defendant as it assumes the risk of being punished for perjury, demands false facts, and takes into account the contents of its statement, the E’s statement has credibility.

B. D, at the same time, was seen in this court, to the effect that “the Defendant is taking advantage of the victim” from E, and that “the Defendant is taking advantage of the victim.”