<Anchor>

It's been a while, so let's revisit the process. Last year, when a suspicion of sexual harassment was admitted, a man's wife named as the perpetrator was innocent on the Internet. As it became known, the incident spread to the gender confrontation between men and women over sexual abuse. Pros and cons were held in the streets as well as online. People's ideas were mixed, but the court's judgment was all guilty.

Reporter Lim Chan-jong will explain in detail the court's decision.

<Reporter>

The Supreme Court ruling took the logic of the two-trial decision in April.

At the time, the trial court said it consistently stated how the victim had been molested.

Other evidence supported the credibility of the statement.

While the specific scenes of sexual harassment were not captured accurately in CCTV, the other scenes in the CCTV testified that the details stated by the victim and that the videographer also apparently had physical contact seemed to be clear.

He also pleaded guilty to the fact that the victim had never asked for a settlement and that there was no reason for him to condense what he did.

The judge's statement, on the other hand, appears to be inconsistent and that the friend of the defendant who was witnessed did not know exactly what happened.

Due to the nature of sex offenses, there is often a case where there is no clear reason to doubt the authenticity of the victim's statement.

[Kim Jung-cheol / Lawyer: In the case of sex crimes and bribery crimes (original), most of the statements are used as the main evidence, and there is a lack of other objective evidence. However, in the case of sex offenses, the Supreme Court has recently been based on gender sensitivity, making it increasingly difficult to deny the credibility of a victim's statement.]

However, there is an opinion that if the accused denies the act itself, the evidence relationship other than the statement must be judged more strictly.

(Video coverage: Ju Yong-jin, Video editing: Lee Seung-hee)