A. Defendant 1) The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim G (hereinafter “victim”) in the same manner as written in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to whether the victim's statement was credibility or not, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment and forty hours of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In determining the credibility of a statement made by a victim, etc., supporting the facts charged, the court below determined the credibility of the statement based on the relevant legal principles, as well as whether the statement itself conforms to the rationality, logic, inconsistency, or rule of experience, or the evidence or the statement made by a third party, as well as whether it conforms to the witness appearance or attitude of a witness who is being sworn before and after being sworn by a judge, and the witness appearance or attitude of a witness who is sworn in the open court, and the witness examination protocol, etc., which are hard to record, are assessed the credibility of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 209; Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Apr. 30, 2009; Supreme Court Decision 2016Do2628, Apr. 26, 2005; Supreme Court Decision 2012Do36126, Apr. 215, 2012).