A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim D and E, as stated in each of the facts charged in this case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the sole basis of the statements of the victims who have no credibility is erroneous.

B. As to the punishment sentenced by the lower court (a pair of punishment amounting to KRW 10 million), the Defendant asserts that the punishment is too excessive and unfair, and that the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts should be made on the grounds that, when determining the credibility of the statement made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court should not without delay reject the statement, unless there are any other reliable materials to deem credibility objectively consistent and consistent with the facts charged (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In addition, when determining the credibility of the statement made by the victim, etc., it is reasonable, logical, and inconsistent with the rule of experience, or consistent with the evidence or third party’s statement, as well as whether the witness’s appearance, attitude, and perception of the statement made in the open court after being sworn before a judge, is considered as being difficult to record, and the witness’s statement made in the witness protocol, such as the victim’s testimony made in the presence of the judge, and the witness’s testimony made in the witness protocol, including the victim’s and other witness’s testimony made in the witness protocol, should be determined whether it complies with the victim’s witness’s body.