Quasi-Indecent Act by Compulsion Defense Case | Acquittal for a Client Charged With Quasi-Indecent Act by Compulsion Against a Minor

After finishing work, the client had a brief gathering for drinks with the staff members who had been working together at the establishment.

The staff members then contacted Mr. A, a minor who had been working part-time with them, and invited him to join the gathering, and Mr. A accepted and attended the gathering.

During the gathering, Mr. A repeatedly vomited and became heavily intoxicated, and the client, judging that Mr. A was in a state in which he could not move on his own, moved him to a nearby hotel.

Even after arriving at the room, Mr. A continued to vomit, so the client removed the soiled outer clothing, washed it with water, hung it on a hanger, and then returned home.

However, Mr. A claimed that the client had removed his underwear and forcibly committed an indecent act, and reported the matter to the police.

Because Mr. A was a minor, the client faced a situation in which serious criminal liability could become an issue, and the client, asserting that the accusation was unjust, requested the assistance of a lawyer who had handled numerous quasi-indecent act by compulsion cases under the Act on the Protection of Children and Youth against Sexual Abuse.

The lawyer specializing in sexual offenses obtained the CCTV footage from inside the establishment and the hotel at the time and closely analyzed the circumstances before and after the incident.

As a result, the following facts were confirmed.

On this basis, the lawyer specializing in sexual offenses logically presented the point that the client, in the course of caring for Mr. A and out of consideration for hygiene and safety, cleaned up the vomit, removed and washed only the soiled outer clothing, and then returned home.

In the course of moving Mr. A to the hotel, the client was accompanied by another staff member, and after arriving at the hotel, he identified himself to the staff and completed the room registration procedure.

This series of actions can hardly be regarded as conduct carried out covertly, and it is also clearly far removed from conduct premised on an intent to commit an indecent act.

The lawyer specializing in sexual offenses emphasized that, when the above specific manner of the act and objective circumstances are considered together, it does not accord with common sense to conclude that the client removed Mr. A's clothing with an intent to commit an indecent act.

According to Supreme Court precedent, in a sexual offense case where the defendant denies the facts charged, and the direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged is in effect limited to the victim's statement, the credibility of that statement must be judged very strictly. [Supreme Court Decision 2021Do3451, August 19, 2022]

In this case, from the early stage the client admitted that he had removed the outer clothing but consistently denied the act of removing the underwear, and no direct evidence sufficient to acknowledge an intent to commit an indecent act was confirmed either.

Nevertheless, Mr. A's side argued that an indecent act had been committed, relying as its key grounds on the circumstances at the time and on the fact that the client's DNA had been detected on the underwear.

In response, the lawyer specializing in sexual offenses emphasized, on the basis of the following circumstances, that the DNA detection result alone made it difficult to reinforce the credibility of the victim's statement and was also insufficient to prove the fact of an indecent act.

The standard for a child or youth to whom the Act on the Protection of Children and Youth against Sexual Abuse applies is a minor under the age of 19 at the time of the incident.

Therefore, even where the victim appears to be an adult in outward appearance, or where the offender believed the offense to be a sexual offense against an adult, if the victim had not yet reached the age of 19 because his or her birthday had not yet passed, the offense is classified as a sexual offense against a child or youth.

In addition, the age standard under the Act on the Protection of Children and Youth against Sexual Abuse is judged on the basis of the victim's age at the time of the offense rather than the victim's current age.

For this reason, one must not respond complacently merely because the victim has become an adult after the incident, and a careful response that takes into account the possibility of the application of the Act on the Protection of Children and Youth against Sexual Abuse from the early stage is necessary.

Sexual offenses against children and youth carry heavier statutory penalties than ordinary sexual offenses, so the course of a case may differ greatly depending on the initial response.

Daeryun LLC closely reviews the direction of statements even before the investigation stage, systematically organizes the relevant materials, and responds strategically throughout the entire investigation process.

If you have become involved in a sexual offense case such as a quasi-indecent act by compulsion against a child or youth in a situation such as the above, please request assistance through a 🔗Legal Consultation Reservation.