A. In relation to the facts-misunderstanding of facts, the documents containing the statement made by the victim'sO in accordance with Articles 2 and 3-1 (a) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be deemed inadmissible as evidence under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and only the first head of the victim'sO is left behind at the time, and there is no fact that the defendant gets the head of the above victim's head.

Nevertheless, the lower court’s judgment that found all of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, each police statement by the victim against the victim shall be admissible pursuant to Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the fact that the defendant gets the head of the victim 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's '

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

① According to the record, the court below adopted the victim as a witness and summoned several times, but the summons of the witness was not served as a closed witness, and it was impossible to find out the location of the witness even if the police officer left the residence of the victim and investigated the victim as a witness upon the request for detection of the witness’s location. In the case of the party, the victim was adopted as a witness and summoned several times in the trial, but the summons of the witness was not served as a witness without the closed text, and the defendant’s defense counsel tried to communicate with the victim’s telephone number stated in the application for the witness, but the receipt was suspended. This is prescribed in Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act.