The facts charged in this case can be found guilty according to the following: the F’s report of witness at the time of the crime in this case was recorded sufficiently; the content of the record appears to have been observed by the Defendant’s indecent act by compulsion; the witness’s testimony of the police officer who heard the witness and the Defendant’s statement at the site; the content and attitude of the Defendant’s vindication at the site; etc.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby acquitted the facts charged of this case.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act adopts the principle of substantial direct examination that the establishment of a conviction for a criminal case’s substance should be based on a trial-oriented principle that the establishment of a conviction for a criminal case is based on a trial-oriented principle, and only the evidence directly examined in the presence of a judge can be based on a trial, and the original evidence near the facts to be proved should be based on a trial-oriented principle that the use of a substitute for the original evidence should not be permitted in principle. This is because a judge can form a new and accurate conviction for a case by directly investigating the original evidence in a court, and the defendant can be given a direct opportunity to state his/her opinion on the original evidence, thereby finding substantial truth and realizing a fair trial.

In particular, the court of first instance, which presides over the criminal procedure, has a sufficient spirit of the principle of substantial direct cross-examination in the process of the criminal procedure and the examination of evidence, mainly focusing on the court in the process of the criminal procedure.