However, since only the defendant appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment below and did not appeal the dismissal part of the public prosecution by both the defendant and the prosecutor, the dismissal part of the above public prosecution in the judgment below becomes separate and conclusive, the scope of this court's judgment is limited

2. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not enter the victim’s house, and there is no fact that the Defendant, leading the victim, brought a motor vehicle fever and threatened the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the charges guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3. Determination

A. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act adopts the principle of substantial direct examination that the formation of a conviction or innocence against the substance of a criminal case shall be based on a trial-oriented principle that it shall be based on a trial-oriented principle, and only the evidence directly examined in the presence of a judge may be based on a trial-oriented trial, and the original evidence near the facts to be proved shall be based on a trial-oriented trial, and the use of a substitute for the original evidence shall not be permitted in principle. In light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance trial, there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or that it is remarkably unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance based on the results of the first instance examination and the evidence duly examined in the first instance trial and the results of additional examination conducted by the time of the closing of argument in the appellate trial, the appellate court shall determine