In this regard, the prosecutor did not appeal but appealed only the defendant's guilty part and the verdict of innocence was finalized as it is, so the scope of the trial per party is limited to the conviction part.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) Defendant did not have the intention to commit an indecent act, such as the facts charged, and did not commit an indecent act as described in the facts charged.

3. The Defendant also asserted the above in the lower court.

The court below rejected the defendant's assertion and found the defendant guilty on the grounds that the credibility of the victim's statement is recognized in light of the circumstances stated in its holding.

If the court below examines the evidence duly adopted and examined, it is just that the above judgment of the court below is just.

As shown in the Defendant’s argument, it is difficult to believe it as is in light of the following: (a) as a taxi driver, the statement made by the witness S is a conclusive statement on the affairs that occurred between the taxi drivers and the passengers aboard at least one year and six months before the date of the statement; and (b) there is an aspect that it is difficult to understand the details of the statement in itself.

4. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless.