A. In full view of the statements of the victim A and witness I in the judgment of conviction (as to the part not guilty in the judgment of the court below), the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even though the defendant could sufficiently recognize the facts of assault A by taking advantage of his/her shoulder, etc.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won of a fine) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the spirit of the substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act to determine the assertion of mistake, if there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or if there are exceptional circumstances to deem that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is considerably unfair, the appellate court should respect the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court, unless the first instance court’s determination and additional evidence examination

(2) In light of the records, the court below's decision that rejected the credibility of each of the above statements made by A and I is justified, and the judgment of the court below was clearly erroneous, in light of the reasons stated in its holding, in addition to the following: (a) the defendant stated that A would have sold the evidence in accordance with the principle of trust and good faith; and (b) the defendant would have made a statement that he would have been in accordance with the principle of trust and good faith; and (c) there was a lack of consistency in the statement on the part of the victim; and (d) the court below appeared as a witness in the court below and did not properly explain the reason why the statement was changed; and (e) the court below did not properly explain it.

There is no circumstance to see that maintaining or maintaining it is remarkably unfair.

In addition, this part of the facts charged is acceptable.