음악산업진흥에관한법률위반
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The gist of the Defendant’s grounds for appeal is that, even though the Defendant did not arrange a contact loan in a singing practice room as indicated in the lower judgment, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby convicting the Defendant of all of the facts charged.
According to the first written statement prepared by E in the police, it is recognized that E had a tobacco heart to its partner women, and the above written statement also entered the phone number of Domins. Although the content of E's statement is somewhat inconsistent with the cost of singing and the above telephone number, as claimed by defense counsel, there are some parts of E's statement.
Even if it is possible to deny the credibility of the entire E's statement, it can not be denied.
In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, unless there are special circumstances to deem that the lower court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by E by the witness of the lower court was clearly erroneous, the Defendant’s crime was all proven without reasonable doubt.
Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit.