2. The summary of the grounds for appeal accepted the statements of the victims, G, and H without credibility and convicted them of the facts charged of this case, even though the defendant did not inflict injury upon the victims at the time and place of the decision of the court below. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. In light of the spirit of substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance witness was clearly erroneous.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court by taking account of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted by the time the appellate trial ends, the appellate court shall respect the judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do494, Nov. 24, 2006). In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the victims, G, and H consistently maintained from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court to the court of the lower trial.

The contents of each diagnosis for victims are considerably specific and consistent with this, such as the name of each diagnosis for victims, the degree and degree of injury, etc., and the credibility may be recognized, and any other addition is possible to reject it.