A. The Defendant, such as misunderstanding of facts, committed a mistake of facts, etc. on the day of the instant case, when reducing KRW 3,000 to cause the victim to drink bread, only caused the Defendant’s loss on the chest part of the victim, and did not have sexual intercourse with the victim as stated in the facts charged in the lower judgment, the lower court convicting the Defendant of the instant facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. When determining the credibility of a statement made by an investigative agency as evidence for a child’s sexual indecent act in a misunderstanding of facts, etc., the following should be examined: (a) the child’s age is how much; (b) how much the child’s age was born; (c) how much the child made a statement after the occurrence of the case; and (d) the guardian or investigator who first heard the child’s damage in the course of the process from the occurrence of the case to the statement after the occurrence of the case; and (c) leading the child to a specific answer by providing a non- fact-finding information or repeated interrogation, etc.; (d) whether there is room to cause a harm to the child memory; (e) whether the child’s statement was not repeatedly made by the questioner at the time of the statement; (e) whether the child’s statement was affected by the questioner; and (e) whether the child’s statement was made by the interviewer; and (e) whether the child’s statement was affected by the interviewer’s statement at the time of the statement.

In addition, the contents of the statement shall also be consistent and clear, the contents of the statement are abundant, the description of the contents, whether there is a characteristic description of the victim of the case, and whether there is information more than a standardized case.