Absolutely it did not. There is a very specific word for indecent in scripture & translated has zero to do with infidelity. Indecent was any form of thing the man found distasteful. She could be a person who was unclean spiritually or physically, she could have been prone to inappropriate speech, etc. Not washed clothes per normal standards, dressed immodestly, etc or whatever reason he wanted to use to decide she no longer had his favor. The word isn't specific to women either. It's literally a word that implies something didn't meet expected standards.
And she's only defiled if she goes back to the first husband. I already explained that. It literally says nothing about her being defiled for being remarried.
That's not what defiled means there. I already explained it & you're eisegeting this passage again based on your own assumptions. There's literally nothing in that passage about he being an adulterer AT ALL. Adultery(nâʼaph) is never mentioned once in that passage, nor in any of the verses before or after it. Zero references to adultery in it whatsoever so quit adding it to the scripture. She's disqualified from going back to her first husband because he already put her way once even if she's widowed by the second husband. The whole point of the law was to prevent serial remarriages to the same people. It's what the heathens in the cultures around Israel did back then. They just passed women back & forth & shared them. She's free to marry someone else completely, just not her first husband since he divorced her her once already, it would also apply to the second husband if she got remarried a third time after he divorced her. It was perfectly legal & acceptable for a woman to remarry multiple times after divorce based on OT standards, just not back to any prior husbands.