2. In full view of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the following circumstances, i.e., ① the victim stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that “the victim took a view of the victim’s body as a parking problem, and considering who the victim wishes to do so, the victim himself/herself was in his/her hands over one time to lower the victim’s right frame.” ② At the investigative agency and the court of the court below, the witness E stated that “the victim was in front of the victim’s face at his/her own seat, and the victim was in front of the balcony at the third floor of his/her house.” While there was a difference between the victim and the witness at the time of the court of the court below and the court of the court below, there was sufficient possibility that the victim appeared in front of the balcony at the time of the witness at the time of the second floor and the witness at the parking lot, the victim was in front of the victim and the witness at the court of the court below, and there was no dispute between the witness and the witness at the court of the court below.