Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in light of the substance of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, unless there exist special circumstances to deem that the first instance court clearly erred in the determination of the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unreasonable to maintain the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination by the time of closing argument in the appellate court, the appellate court shall not reverse the first instance court’s judgment on the grounds that the first instance court’s

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do4994 Decided November 24, 2006; 2008Do4449 Decided July 29, 2010; 201Do5313 Decided June 14, 2012, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do5313, Jun. 24, 2012).

In full view of the following facts admitted by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that recognized the credibility of D’s statement cannot be deemed to have been clearly erroneous or remarkably unfair, and it can be acknowledged that the Defendant forged or exercised the D’s statement as stated in its reasoning.

1 D was present at the court below as a witness, and D did not prepare a statement of this case, and it was the defendant to prepare a written statement.