C A sound has been cut in the name of the defendant, and the defendant has been seated in front of the bus, and the defendant only moved to the rear knee of the bus, and D cannot be considered to have been seated over the knee of C, and there is no knee of C.

The Defendant appeared as a witness of the Daegu District Court Pohang Branch 2013 High Order 1346, which stated the facts in accordance with his memory as above.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged based on the evidence in its judgment.

B. The judgment of this court 1) In light of the difference between the method of evaluating the credibility of the first instance court and the appellate court in accordance with the spirit of the substantial direct trial principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s decision was clearly erroneous in its determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court.

Unless there are 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 trial is final and conclusive, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the 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 Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). 2) The lower court directly examined C, and then recognized the credibility of the testimony.