beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal does not contain any fact that the Defendant, on the date and time and place indicated in the facts charged of this case, left the place or duplicating the sexual organ, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on a different premise, which affected the conclusion of the judgment
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. On December 16, 2018, around 01:55, the Defendant: (a) placed his or her will in the street where many and unspecified persons in front of Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu; (b) put his or her sexual organ back to the public by openly smelling his or her sexual organ.
B. Although the lower court also asserted that the Defendant was not guilty as the grounds for appeal, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by taking account of the respective written statements in C, D, and E, C, and D’s written statements.
C. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, it is difficult to readily conclude that the instant facts charged were proven without reasonable doubt, and no other evidence exists to prove otherwise.
1) At the time of the instant case, D and E did not directly have observed the call of the Defendant at the time of the instant case, and merely stated that C made the statement to the effect that “the Defendant was in a sexual intercourse.” As such, their entries in their respective court statements and written statements in D cannot be evidence to directly support the instant facts charged. At the time of the instant case, C reported to the police to the effect that “At the time of the instant case, D and D are in a face-to-face while the Defendant was in a face-to-face and they were in a face-to-face, and they again reported to the police that “at the time of the instant case, D and D are in a face-to-face and they were in a face-to-face of the Defendant’s face-to-face,” and that they were present at the time of “at the court of the lower trial”.