2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The lower court rejected the credibility of the victim’s statement for the detailed reasons indicated in the reasoning of the judgment after having directly examined the victim’s evidence by undergoing the procedure for examination of the witness, etc., and acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there was no proof of the crime.

In light of the records of this case, it is difficult to see that such judgment of the court below was clearly erroneous, and it is not considerably unreasonable to maintain the judgment of the court below even after comprehensively considering the victim's trial statement again examined at the court below.

B. According to the “112 Report Processing List” duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, ① the victim reported to 112 on November 22, 2013 to the effect that “the son was assaulted against the son.” On the same day, the police officer dispatched to 01:35:31 on the same day and arrived at the site at 01:38:18 on the same day; ② the Defendant also has a dispute with the 01:38:40 on the same day.

‘The fact reported' is recognized as having been reported to 112.

In light of the above 112 reporting details, the prosecutor asserts to the effect that the victim's statement is more reliable since the defendant, who became aware of the fact that the police officer was dispatched to the site by 112 reporting the victim's 112 reporting, is suspected to have immediately reported his/her assault to 112, immediately thereafter.

However, the defendant consistently reported to 112 in advance of the victim in an investigative agency (the investigative record 18-19, 29 pages, and 31 pages).