2. In light of the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, if there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or if it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, the appellate court should respect the determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance, unless there are exceptional circumstances where it is deemed that the first instance court’s determination on

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313 Decided June 14, 2012, etc.). Based on the aforementioned legal doctrine, the lower court directly examined the facts charged in the instant case by following the process of examining the witnesses D and E, etc.: (a) recognized each of the credibility thereof; (b) convicted the Defendant of each of the facts charged in the instant case; and (c) rendered the lower judgment on the credibility of each of the statements made by witnesses D and E was clearly erroneous.

The defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit, since it seems that maintaining the judgment of the court below on the credibility of the judgment is not significantly unfair.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.