A. 1) In the case of larceny against the victim C and the victim H, the Defendant was guilty of the above part of the facts charged solely on the victim’s statement and testimony. The lower court erred in misunderstanding of facts, but there was no fact that the Defendant brought money and valuables owned by the victim. However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the above part of the facts charged on the basis of the victim’s statement that the credibility is insufficient. The lower court erred in misapprehending of facts.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (five years of imprisonment, confiscation, etc.) on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In determining the credibility of a statement made by a victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court of the relevant legal doctrine has to assess the credibility of the statement, taking into account all the circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, including the appearance and attitude of the witness, and the penology of the statement, and the penology of the statement, which are hard to record in the witness examination protocol, after being sworn before a judge, in order to determine the credibility of the statement made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009). In a case where the statements made by the witness, including the victim, are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission unless there is any other reliable evidence that can be objectively deemed to have no credibility from the point of view of the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do362, Apr. 15, 2005).