Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the court below found the defendant guilty based on the statements of the victim, etc. who is not reliable, thereby affecting the judgment.

2. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the victim and G et al., were relatively consistent and concrete to the effect that the defendant was harming the victim's chest by pushing the victim's chest up to the court of the court below's trial. ② At the time when the court of the court below held that the defendant was the victim's chest, and the defendant did not exercise the physical power against the victim due to the F real estate, and the defendant did not exercise the physical power against the victim. At the time when the victim was the victim, G et al. in real estate, while the victim was her and the victim was her, G et al. (the trial record 40, 41, 444 of the court below's trial record). The victim's statement made by the defendant himself and operated the real estate within the real estate (G and H). It did not err in the misapprehension of facts against the defendant's statement (Evidence evidence records, 29, 47 of the court below's judgment below's reasoning.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.