A. Since it is doubtful whether the victim’s written statement falls under the requirements of Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act and can be seen as evidence of conviction, the lower court erred by finding a false fact-finding based on the victim’s statement that has no admissibility of evidence and thereby convicted the Defendant.

B. Even if the Defendant was guilty of an unreasonable sentencing sentence, the lower court’s punishment (one million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The written statement prepared by the victim during the investigation process is admissible as evidence of the victim’s statement under Article 312(5) and (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The victim’s statement is admissible as evidence only when the victim’s statement is acknowledged by the victim’s statement on the trial date, or meets the requirements under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act. In other words, it is impossible for the victim to make a statement on the grounds of death, disease, residence abroad, unknown whereabouts, or any other similar reasons, and the statement is made under particularly reliable circumstances. Here, “when the statement was made under particularly reliable circumstances” means that there is little room for false entry in the content of the statement or the preparation of the protocol or documents, and there is no specific and external circumstance to guarantee the credibility or ariness of the statement, and the record first of all, the court below did not transmit the written summons to the victim’s address at the time of detection of the victim’s address as the victim’s witness at the time of correction by the victim’s second 80-6 witness’s address.