A. In the absence of the fact that the Defendant committed indecent act by compulsion of G, G, and H, the lower judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part) C and D did not have any reason to make a false statement despite the fact that they were assaulted by the Defendant, and there are parts that seem not consistent or contradictory to the witness’s statement. However, this is merely a part of the description of the situation in the process of making a statement by the investigator or questioner’s method, investigation and statement, etc., that is, there may be some distortions or errors in the victim’s memory or perceptions at the time when the time when the victim’s statement was made, or a part of the victim’s memorys or perceptions may be distorted, and the credibility of each statement in C and D cannot be rejected. Accordingly, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged as to each assault committed by the Defendants C and D, but the lower court erred by misapprehending of facts, and thus, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of unfair sentencing (2.5 million won).

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserts that there was no indecent act by compulsion of G from the investigative agency to this court, or that there was no assault against G and H, among the facts charged in this case, the Defendant denied the points of indecent act by compulsion of G and the points of assault against G and H among the facts charged. As such, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court are as follows: (i) G was investigated by the investigative agency and stated very detailed and detailed about the situation at the time of the instant crime and its post and the method of committing the instant crime; and (ii) the testimony in the court of the lower court’s trial is consistent and specific as the contents are consistent with each other in important parts, thereby recognizing credibility in G’s statement.