A. 1) The Defendant was aware of the fact that the victim had a defect in his/her mobile phone to make a recording, and the Defendant did not directly get his/her cell phone away from his/her cell phone and did not know of the whereabouts of his/her mobile phone thereafter. As such, the victim’s statement that is contrary to this cannot be trusted and the Defendant did not destroy the property.

2) 폭행의 점 피고인은 손바닥으로 피해자의 뺨을 때리려는 가벼운 시늉을 보였을 뿐 실제로 피해자를 때린 사실이 없는 바, 이와 배치되는 피해자의 진술은 믿을 수 없고 피고인은 공소사실과 같이 피해자를 폭행한 사실이 없다.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts was clearly erroneous in the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance trial witness in light of the spirit of substantial direct psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, or in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the additional examination conducted until the closing of pleadings at the appellate court, the appellate court shall respect the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012, 201; 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). In relation to the damage of property, the lower court shall comprehensively consider the relevant evidence duly adopted and examined, including the victim G’s legal statement and investigation stage, the witness D’s partial statement, the investigation report (written confirmation on the mobile phone subscription of the complainant), and the text message (D mobile phone opening).