The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below is just in finding that the court below convicted all of the charges of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (indecent act by force in relation to relatives), and violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof (in relation to relatives), on the grounds stated in its reasoning. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the admissibility and probative value of video recordings

In addition, Article 30(6) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes cannot be deemed as a unconstitutional provision in violation of Article 10 of the Constitution and Article 11(1) of the Constitution that provides for the dignity and value of human beings and the obligation to guarantee fundamental rights of the State, which provides for the right to equality, and thus, it cannot be accepted

Meanwhile, the argument that there is an error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the admissibility of evidence of the hearsay statement is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal by the defendant, or by the court below that it is not subject to judgment ex officio

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.