2. Determination:

A. In light of the content of the first instance judgment of the relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness at the first instance court was clearly erroneous.

Unless there exist special circumstances to view that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is clearly unfair, or considering the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of pleadings, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do827, Oct. 14, 2010; 2013Do11802, Nov. 28, 2013). (b) The first instance court also asserted that the grounds for appeal were the same in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s allegation in the part on “the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” of the judgment.

According to the evidence duly admitted by the court below and the court below, in light of the fact that the principal statement of the victim as to the circumstance of the case is consistent and specific, and there is no clear error in the judgment of the first instance or the maintenance of the first instance judgment, it cannot be seen that the court below's judgment was clearly erroneous or considerably unfair circumstances.