The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On July 20, 2013, at the long-term point of “Emart” located in Kimpo-si D on July 18:49, 2013, the Defendant: (a) when the Victim F (F) works within the 33 years of age) was called “Emart”, the Defendant received a telephone within the said area; (b) went out of the phone; and (c) took the victim’s her hand, thereby committing an indecent act by force.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s defense counsel denies the facts charged by asserting that the Defendant’s hand was merely contact with the victim’s body during the period of telephone call from the Marart shop guidance room, and then out of the guidance room, the Defendant’s defense counsel denies the charge.

B. (1) The offense of indecent act by compulsion includes not only cases where the other party commits an indecent act after making it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation, but also cases where the act of assault itself is recognized as an indecent act. As long as the assault does not necessarily require the degree of suppressing the other party’s intent and there is the exercise of tangible force against the other party’s will, regardless of its power, the assault is against the other party’s will.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2417 Decided April 26, 2002, etc.). In determining whether an indecent act objectively causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom as an act contrary to good sexual morality, which constitutes an infringement on the victim’s will, gender, age, relationship between the perpetrator and the victim prior to such act, circumstances leading to such act, specific form of act, and the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual moral sense of that time, etc., shall be determined with caution, comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, offender and the victim

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do7107 Decided July 14, 2005, etc.). Meanwhile, the conviction in a criminal trial ought to be based on the evidence of probative value, to the extent that there is no room for a judge to make reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, and there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction.