A Case of Defending Against Punishment for the Crime of Indecent Act by Compulsion | At Risk of Punishment on a Suspicion of an Indecent Act by Compulsion but a Judgment of Acquittal

After reviewing the content of the summary order the client had received, the sex-crime lawyer organized the matters on which an acquittal could be contested at the formal trial.

The client acknowledged the fact of the contact itself but wished to argue that the conduct had not arisen from a sexual intent or an intent to commit an indecent act.

Accordingly, the sex-crime lawyer prepared the formal trial procedure to contest the summary order and compared, one by one, whether the content the prosecutor argued matched the situation at the scene.

Daeryun's sex-crime lawyer, together with the Evidence Investigation Center, analyzed by time period the CCTV footage that captured the scene at the time of the incident.

The footage confirmed the scene in which the client and the counterpart each arrived at the scene holding an umbrella, the scene in which the client folded the umbrella, and the scene in which the counterpart came toward the client and held an umbrella over the client.

On this basis, the lawyer submitted on-site photographs and CCTV analysis materials, explaining that the place of contact was an open road on which people and vehicles came and went, and argued that it was difficult to regard the client as having secretly approached the counterpart and committed an indecent act by compulsion.

The lawyer then presented, as a basis, the purport of Supreme Court Decision 2024Do18701 and 2023Do10410, September 4, 2025.

That precedent held that if physical contact that occurs in an everyday situation can be seen as natural conduct under the circumstances at the time, it is difficult to immediately recognize that contact as sexual conduct.

On the basis of this precedent, the sex-crime lawyer argued that the contact scene must be viewed within the surrounding circumstances and the situation of the place, and that it was difficult to conclude that the client's conduct was an indecent act subject to punishment for the crime of indecent act by compulsion.

The sex-crime lawyer organized rebuttal materials centered on the parts where the counterpart's statement and the CCTV footage did not match.

In the witness examination, the lawyer structured the questions so that the conversation before and after the contact, the reaction at the time, and the circumstances of the subsequent movement would be revealed.

In this process, presenting Supreme Court Decision 2023Do13081, January 4, 2024, as a basis, the lawyer argued that even if there was a fact that the hand had been touched, whether there was a sexual intent in that conduct must be judged separately.

Supreme Court Decision 2023Do13081, January 4, 2024

In addition, the lawyer secured and submitted a witness's written confirmation of facts and an acquaintance's petition.

The lawyer also submitted counseling materials, movement-route materials, and on-site photographic materials, explaining the point that the two had not been a relationship that first became acquainted on the day of the incident and the circumstances under which it was difficult to regard the client as having approached with a sexual intent.

Punishment for the crime of indecent act by compulsion applies where an act that gives sexual discomfort in a manner the counterpart does not want is found.

Article 298 of the Criminal Act regards a case in which a person commits an indecent act against another through assault or intimidation as an indecent act by compulsion.

The assault or intimidation here may include even conduct of applying force to or making contact with the body against the counterpart's wishes, so even brief physical contact is subject to punishment for the crime of indecent act by compulsion depending on the body part contacted and the situation.

However, the fact that there was brief contact with the hand area, as in this case, does not mean that an indecent act by compulsion is immediately established.

This is because the court judges whether there is an indecent nature by examining together the remarks and the place at the time of the contact, the relationship between the two persons, and the reactions before and after the contact.

Therefore, if you are unfairly placed at risk of punishment for the crime of indecent act by compulsion, you must organize in detail the circumstances of the contact, the remarks at the time, the conduct before and after, and the circumstances of the place, and contest the point that there was no intent to commit an indecent act.

A summary order is a procedure by which the court orders a fine or the like based only on documents, without opening a formal trial.

When one receives a summary order on suspicion of an indecent act by compulsion, it may appear to end merely by paying a fine, but once the summary order becomes final, a criminal record remains, and sex-crime-related disadvantages may also follow.

A request for a formal trial is a procedure of contesting the summary order and seeking a fresh judgment in court, and under Article 453 of the Criminal Procedure Act it must be made within seven days from the day the summary order is served.

When requesting a formal trial, it is important, as in the case above, to present in detail the CCTV footage, the conversation content, the circumstances of the contact, and the on-site circumstances.

At Daeryun, the ninth-largest law firm in Korea (based on 2025 value-added tax filings with the National Tax Service), the sex-crime lawyer and the Evidence Investigation Center together analyze the CCTV footage, on-site photographs, movement-route materials, and the content of the statements to set the direction of the response for each case.

If you need assistance in connection with a response to a police investigation, contesting a summary order, or requesting a formal trial, we invite you to first confirm the case materials and the possibility of a defense through 🔗reserving a legal consultation.