Facts
[X.] was found guilty by the District Court of Uster on 20 November 2014 of exploiting a state of distress and multiple attempted exploitations of a state of distress, and was punished with a suspended fine and a penalty. He was also ordered to pay [A.] compensation of CHF 1,500.--.
[X.] appealed against this judgment. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich acquitted him of the charge of exploiting a state of distress on 11 May 2016, but convicted him of sexual harassment and imposed a fine of CHF 1,000.--. The High Court dismissed [A.] 's claim for compensation.
The High Court assumed that [X.] , as [A.] 's superior in a sheltered employment relationship, had tried to kiss her, touch her breasts, and open her trousers on her first "trial work day".
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that physical harassment under Art. 198 para. 2 SCC requires physical contact. Even though, according to the findings of the lower courts, there was no contact with the intimate area, as the victim was able to fend off the attacks, the offence of physical sexual…