A. The Defendant was not guilty of assaulting the victim as stated in the instant facts charged.

B. The punishment of the lower court is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, the first instance court clearly erred in the determination on the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court by taking account of the results of the first instance examination and the results of an additional examination of evidence until the closing of pleadings, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009; 2010Do3846, Jun. 24, 2010). The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by recognizing the credibility of the statement after examining the victim as a witness and recognizing the credibility of the statement as evidence, and in light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, there is no particular circumstance to reverse the lower judgment.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing after the appeal for the judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record are examined, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant was made within the scope of the court’s discretion of sentencing, and it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable to the extent that it cannot escape from reversal.

. the defendant's objection.