Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment by finding the guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds of the statements of the victim and witness without credibility.

2. The lower court also held that the Defendant did not mar the Defendant’s body to the victimized person’s her mar, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, and that there was no act of family.

Even if the defendant did not have the intention to commit an indecent act by force due to the act that occurred in the process of getting off the elevator.

The court below asserted the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., victim D, consistently up to the police and the court of the court of the court below, that the defendant committed an indecent act by breaking the body of the defendant at the elevator to her her tumm.

“The victim made a statement as “,” and there is no reason to make a false statement detrimental to the Defendant even when the victim is in charge of the punishment for perjury, and there is no reason to see any false statement in the statement, and there is credibility in the statement in light of the victim’s attitude of the statement in the court of original trial, and ② E, a witness, consistently in the police and the court of original instance, regarded the Defendant as being closely adhered to the victim’s body at the elevator, and prevented the Defendant from taking it down.

I tried to contact the Defendant's sexual flag and the victim's her tock.

As “E’s statement” is written, there is no inconsistency with the victim’s statement, and there is no reason to open false statements to the victim, and there is credibility in light of the attitude of the statement in the court below’s court, and ③ the Defendant is on the elevator.