2. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility in accordance with the spirit of substantial direct deliberation adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness at the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court’s first instance court’s evidence.

Unless there exist extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance trial and the result of further examination of evidence conducted by the time the appellate court final and conclusive, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). In light of the above legal principles, a thorough examination of the evidence by the lower court, such as the witness D and F’s legal statement, was clearly erroneous in the lower court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness.

Unless there are special circumstances to see that H’s statement of the party witness is insufficient to reverse the judgment of the court below because it is merely a lack of statements from the defendant such as the statement in the facts charged.

Therefore, since the defendant can be recognized that he made a statement to F, etc. like the facts charged, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

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