1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. As to the credibility of the victim’s statement, when determining the credibility of the victim’s statement, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court held that the victim’s statement of this case should not be dismissed without permission, unless there are any other reliable materials that can objectively be objectively deemed objectively, and objectively deemed objectively, and objectively, and thus, are consistent with the reasonableness, logic, and empirical rule of the contents of the statement itself, whether it conforms to the evidence or the third party’s statement, and whether it conforms to the evidence or the third party’s statement in the open court after taking an oath before a judge, the court found the victim guilty of the charges of indecent act by compulsion on the ground that the victim’s statement of this case was credibility on the grounds of the following circumstances: (a) the witness’s appearance and attitude, and the penation of the statement; and (b) the witness’s statement of the victim, including the victim, are consistent with the victim’s statement; and (c) the court below found the victim’s statement of this case to be credibility in the facts charged.

3) Examining the records in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles regarding the determination of credibility of the victim’s statement, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules. (B) Even if a private person recorded the contents of conversation with the Defendant, it cannot be said to be inadmissible as evidence illegally collected by the recording file or the recording recording recorded therefrom (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3299, Jan. 14, 2005).