Case Type: Indecent Assault Resulting in Injury (Aggravated Indecent Assault) 

Result: Decision of Non-Remand (No Suspicion) by the Police 

Case Details:

1. Case Overview

The client was assigned to the same barracks with his peers during his military service at the Nonsan Army Training Center. The client and the accuser became close from the beginning of their training due to compatible personalities, establishing a relationship with frequent mutual physical contact, such as lightly grabbing shoulders or joking around, which was witnessed by all barracks peers. However, when the client reported the accuser to the Military Grievance Deliberation Committee due to the accuser’s inappropriate sexual harassment, the accuser filed a retaliatory counter-complaint against the client for indecent assault resulting in injury. The accuser claimed that the client had touched and poked his chest, even submitting a medical certificate for the alleged injury.

2. Key Issues and Legal Analysis

The core strategy of this case was to demonstrate the accuser's motive for malicious false accusation, clarify the background of mutual physical contact, and refute the causal relationship of the alleged injury. According to Supreme Court precedents (including Supreme Court Decision 2016Do21231, Oct. 31, 2017), the determination of indecent assault must comprehensively consider not only the victim’s intent but also the relationship between the parties and the circumstances leading up to the act. Statements from barracks peers confirmed that the accuser had previously initiated physical contact, and it was emphasized that courts strictly judge the establishment of indecent assault regarding casual physical interactions between close soldiers. Furthermore, we actively argued that the submitted medical certificate relied solely on the accuser's subjective complaints and could not establish a direct causal link with the client’s actions.

3. Defense Counsel’s Assistance and Outcome

The defense counsel submitted a systematic legal brief during the investigation stage to directly refute the claims in the complaint. In particular, we cited precedents ruling that criminal intent for indecent assault cannot be recognized if the actor mistakenly believed there was consent (including Gwangju District Court Decision 2019GoHap119, Oct. 25, 2019), demonstrating that it aligned perfectly with the circumstances of this case. After a thorough review of the defense's legal arguments and objective circumstantial evidence, the investigating authority issued a Decision of Non-Remand (No Suspicion) regarding the client's charges. As a result, the client was able to resolve the matter completely without any criminal record of sexual offenses.

Case Inquiry: Attorney Min-hoo Kim