The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul Southern District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: “The Defendant, from around 13:00 on December 10, 201 to around 13:30 on the same day, committed an indecent act by force against the victim (the victim (the 30-year-old age-old age-old), who complained of the pain pains of the said hospital from around 13:0 on December 10, 201, against the victim (the 30-year-old age-old) who was under the physical therapy.”

Although the Defendant consistently denied the facts charged from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant of the facts charged by using the victim’s statement as evidence.

2. The criminal defendant is presumed innocent until a judgment of conviction becomes final and conclusive (Article 27(4) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, Article 275-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act). In addition, the principle of “the interest of the criminal defendant when he/she is in doubt” does not specifically stipulate the Criminal Procedure Act, but is a major principle that controls the criminal trial as the basic principle of a constitutional state inherent in the above Constitution

Therefore, the finding of guilt in a criminal trial should be based on evidence of probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, it is doubtful that the defendant is guilty even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

3. Examining the reasoning and records of the lower judgment in accordance with such legal doctrine on November 12, 2004, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

(1) Even based on the facts charged as charged by the lower court, the Defendant’s indecent act by compulsion committed by the Defendant, a physical therapy hospital, takes part in the beds while the Defendant, who was a physical therapy hospital, provides a veterinary treatment to the victim about 30 minutes of the physical therapy room.