A. As to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts (whether the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim) 1, the court below rejected the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts without any separate reliable evidence to deem that the defendant's statement, including the victim, is consistent with the reasonableness, logic, and morality of the contents of the statement itself or the rule of experience, or conforms with the witness's statement or third party's statement after being sworn before a judge, and rejected the defendant's assertion of indecent act against the victim's defense counsel as a result of a comprehensive examination of evidence, including the witness's appearance and attitude, and the penance of the statement, which is difficult to record in the open court after being sworn before a judge, and the witness's statement, including the victim, can be evaluated as credibility by directly observing the circumstances that are hard to record. If the defendant's statement is consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it should not be rejected without exception unless there is any specific and reliable evidence to conclude that it is objectively reliable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631).2).

3. Examining the following circumstances in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, along with the circumstances determined by the lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is just and acceptable. In so doing, it cannot be deemed that the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, as alleged by the Defendant or defense counsel,

(1) The victims shall commit the crime of immigration.