2. In light of the content of the judgment of the first instance and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous in the determination.

The first instance court's decision on the credibility of the witness's statement may not be reversed without permission, unless there are exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance court's decision on the credibility of the witness's statement, in full view of the results of the first instance court's examination and the results of additional examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate court's oral proceedings (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). The court below acknowledged the credibility of the witness's statement after the direct examination of evidence, such as the process of examination of witness with E and H, and found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. Although the above witness's statement in the detailed part is not inconsistent with the witness's statement in the investigative agency, it is deemed that there is an error or a limitation of memory, and since the witness's statement on the main part of the crime is consistent and specific, it is sufficient that the court below's decision on the credibility of the above statement was clearly erroneous, or that the remainder of the defendant's testimony is unlawful.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 3 of the judgment of the court below).