The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On December 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 23:50 on December 1, 2015, at subway No. 1 line D located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, used the victim E (age 31), who was seated in the left side of the Defendant, for approximately one minute above the left hand.

As a result, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in the former car which is a means of public transportation.

2. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial against which a public prosecution has been instituted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient to cause a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt against the defendant even if there is no such evidence.

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

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14731, Dec. 23, 2010). In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the following circumstances revealed as a result of the instant trial, it is difficult to deem that the facts charged are proven beyond a reasonable doubt solely with the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

① The sole evidence that corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case is the victim’s statement.

However, the victim's statement was embuckbucks, and it was not directly a witness to commit an indecent act.

② The passengers who are seated in the subway room are bound to be tightly adhered to the passenger. Moreover, the date when this case occurred, most of the passengers seems to have suffered clothes.

As such, it is not possible to exclude the possibility that any movement of the accused under the influence of alcohol would cause misunderstanding to the victim.

③ If the defendant committed a crime, the motive of this case is for the sexual satisfaction of the defendant.

On the other hand, at the time.