Constitutional Court overturns 'no charges' ruling in workplace groping case, citing inadequate investigation

The Constitutional Court has overturned a decision by prosecutors to drop charges against a man accused of groping a female colleague, ruling that investigators failed to conduct a thorough probe and improperly dismissed the victim's account solely because she had been drinking.

According to the official gazette published Wednesday, the court unanimously ruled in favor of a constitutional complaint filed by the victim, identified as A, and annulled the Yeoju branch of the Suwon District Prosecutors Office's decision not to indict the suspect.

A and the suspect, identified as B, were colleagues. B is accused of groping A inside a taxi as they were heading home after a drinking gathering in June 2024, allegedly wrapping his arm around her neck and pulling her toward him.

A reported B to police the following day. B later told A in a phone call that he was sorry and had no memory of what had happened that night.

A then asked B for the taxi payment records so she could contact the driver, but B refused. Investigators found that B had already reached out to the driver himself to ask whether the driver had witnessed anything and whether dashcam footage existed.

B subsequently changed his account during police questioning, saying he had fallen asleep in the taxi and was certain he had not committed any groping. The taxi driver told police he had not witnessed any assault and that such an incident was highly unlikely.

However, when asked whether he had kissed the victim, B denied it — a response that a polygraph examination flagged as deceptive.

Police found A's account credible and referred the case to prosecutors with a recommendation for indictment, but prosecutors dropped the charges for lack of evidence. A filed a constitutional complaint in February last year seeking to have that decision overturned.

The Constitutional Court sided with A, finding no basis to doubt the credibility of her account and concluding that prosecutors had failed to adequately examine the circumstances surrounding B's change of testimony.

"Prosecutors appear to have dismissed the credibility of A's account based solely on minor inconsistencies in her statements about peripheral details, without requesting supplementary investigation into whether A had any motive to make statements unfavorable to B," the court said. "The decision not to indict resulted from an arbitrary assessment of evidence and factual errors stemming from an incomplete investigation, a process that violated the complainant's right to equality and her right to make statements in judicial proceedings."

“미장 하루 만에 ‘420% 급등’했다…절호의 기회” 신고가 찍고 있다는 ‘이 종목’

https://biz.heraldcorp.com/article/10768122