1. First of all, the argument regarding the prosecuted case is that the lower court erred in its findings of fact as to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape, etc.), the occupation of perjury, and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Retaliatory, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on the premise thereof are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it goes beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence by violating logical and empirical rules.

In light of the records, in this case where it is not possible to find out that the facts established by the court below exceeded the above limit even after examining the reasoning of the judgment below, the above appeal shall not be accepted merely because it criticizes the matters falling under the exclusive authority of the court below.

In addition, the grounds of appeal should be specified by citing facts expressed in the records of trial and in the examination of evidence by the court below. Thus, citing the grounds of appeal stated in the grounds of appeal cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal.

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Do2716 delivered on February 13, 1996, etc.). Of the facts charged in the instant case, as regards the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapon, etc.) against the victim K, the assault and confinement against the victim F, the attempted attack against the victim H, the victim G’s attack against the victim G, and the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapon, etc.) against the victim P, there is no specific grounds for appeal citing the grounds for appeal in the appellate brief, and there is no specific grounds for appeal. Thus, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

On the other hand, the evidence adopted by the court of first instance and the records recognized by the court below are the defendant's and the person requesting an attachment order (hereinafter "the defendant")'s age, family relation, and this is the same.