Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not immediately lock the water surface guidance with the victim and commit an indecent act against the victim.

The victim committed a crime as stated in the facts charged of this case.

However, the victim reported that he was in a state that he was unable to make a normal judgment by taking part in the part of the Defendant and the Plaintiff’s sofacinal, and that he was in a state of being unable to make a normal judgment of the situation by mashing the macin, and that the Defendant committed an indecent act on himself in order to independently and independently

Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that the victim's statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case cannot be trusted.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below convicting the defendant of the facts charged is erroneous.

2. Determination on the defendant's case

A. The lower court determined that, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant could sufficiently believe the victim’s statement directly supporting the instant facts charged, and thus, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant committed an indecent act with the intent to commit an indecent act by force against the victim with the intent to commit an act identical to the facts charged.

The decision was determined.

1) The victim made a consistent statement in detail at the police, the prosecution, and the court of original instance on the grounds and process for the victim to have a conflict with the defendant immediately before the crime, the background and circumstances where the victim got sculp with the defendant, and the victim's awareness as to the situation where the victim sculpeded with the victim's chest.

The statement of the victim in the court below is consistent with most of the main parts without having a significant difference from the first statement made by the police, and it is deemed impossible to make a statement without having a direct experience in the whole process of crime.