Even if the defendant made such a statement, it is not recognized as a performance because there was no possibility that it would be disseminated to many unspecified or unspecified persons in light of the relationship with E by one word to one person E.

However, the lower court recognized the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by E, namely, ① the Defendant’s speech from the police to the court of the lower court that F am lick, and there is no motive or reason for E to make a false statement, so the above statement is reliable; ② The above statement from the Defendant was credibility; ② the Defendant’s speech from K, F, and L (M) was sent to K, K, and L (L)’s owner after a few hours, while he am click, and there was another customer at the time, ③ the Defendant’s office did not know about the E and 20 years, but it was no possibility for the Defendant to do so; ③ the Defendant’s statement to the Defendant, including the Defendant’s husband, 197, 90, 97, 90, 97, 90, 96, 90, 97, 90, 96, 9, 90, 96, 90, 96, 9, 9, etc.).

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so ordered.