A. The summary of the oral argument submitted on January 9, 2020 after the deadline for submitting grounds for appeal of mistake of facts and the subsequent appellate brief are determined to the extent that it supplements the grounds for appeal.

On April 2, 2019, the Defendant had no fact of threatening the said victim by putting the knife of the victim D’s face and threatening the said victim (Article 1 of the facts of prosecution). On April 6, 2019, there is no fact that the Defendant detained the said victim in a singing room by threateninging the said victim with the kitchen knife.

(Article 2-2(b)(b) of the Prosecution

The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Unless there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court in accordance with the spirit of the substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, or where it is highly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate court, the appellate court shall respect the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313 Decided June 14, 2012, etc.). The lower court convicted all of the facts charged in the instant case, and closely examined the lower court’s findings of fact and the record in light of the following, there are special circumstances to deem that the lower court clearly erred in its determination as to the credibility of the statement made by the victim.

Since it is not recognized that maintaining the judgment of the court below on the credibility of the victim's statement or the victim's statement is significantly unfair, the judgment of the court below on the credibility of the victim's statement is just.