1. The judgment of the court below is reversed.

2. The defendant is innocent;

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts) is that the Defendant did not have any her her buttt, as stated in the judgment below, and even if so, such fact exists.

Even if an indecent act is not committed intentionally.

2. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. On November 6, 2014, at around 22:43, the Defendant was seated in the 4-3 square column of the subway car that arrives in the E station located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City on November 6, 2014, and the summary of the facts charged passes through the left side of the Victim F (F, 26 years old), and the Defendant left the victim’s left seat.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in the subway train, which is a densely concentrated place for the public.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged based on the duly admitted evidence.

3. According to the evidence submitted by the relevant prosecutor, it is possible to recognize the fact that the Defendant was satisfe F’s body at the date and place indicated in the facts charged.

On the other hand, however, the records can be recognized as follows.

In full view of the circumstances such as the foregoing, the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone that the Defendant’s physical strength was caused by the Defendant’s intentional indecent act by the Defendant, as such, was proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

A. The Defendant was a very short period of time when he met F’s body.

F also stated in the lower court’s trial to the effect that “the time was net and simple,” and “the continuous time had not elapsed” (the page 43 pages of the trial record). The Defendant’s defense that the Defendant’s act of deceiving F’s body does not go against the content of the Defendant’s defense that “the Defendant’s act of securing F’s body is an objective and external appearance,” which read “the Defendant’s act of securing F’s body as a passage to getting off.”

B. On the other hand, F was intended to have the defendant met himself in the court below's decision.

Appellants, alleging “assumed.”