2. In light of the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly examined and adopted by this court, it is insufficient to recognize that the F’s statement alone is sufficient to recognize that the Defendant took the victim’s face as shown in the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

① The victim made a statement in the police to the effect that the defendant had committed a kymnous thing on him, so that the defendant was acute to the escapeer, and did not make a statement to the effect that the defendant assaulted the face of the victim by drinking, and did not make a clear statement on this part in court.

(2) The victim was together with the victim.

GDo also stated in the investigative agency that the defendant and the victim met each other, but in the court, it was not possible to see whether the defendant assaulted the victim by drinking.

was stated.

③ Even though D also made a statement at an investigative agency to the effect that the Defendant and the victim were stuffed with drinking, it did not specifically state whether the Defendant was faced with the victim’s face, and in this court, it made a statement to the effect that the victimized person unilaterally made the Defendant.

4. The F confirmed that the victim and G had the fighting between the Defendant and D before the head of C, and entered his house H, had the fighting, and had the Defendant and the victim told him again, and during that, the Defendant and the victim got the face at one time.

A statement was made but was made in the same manner as the statement of the victim that the victim was fested to escape.

In light of the G’s statement, F.C.