All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In fact, the lower court found Defendant 1 guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the lower court did not have made a speech to insult the victim as stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1), the part of the facts charged was sufficiently specified and the defendant could have found the fact that he insultingd the victim, but the court below dismissed the prosecution against this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2) Improper sentencing of the lower court is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where a witness’s statement, including a victim of a judgment on his/her assertion, such as mistake of facts, is consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless there exists any separate evidence to deem that the credibility of the statement is objectively acceptable, and the witness’s statement is somewhat inconsistent with the witness’s statement on other minor matters in the major part, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008; 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). Meanwhile, considering the difference between the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court in light of the spirit of substantial direct deliberation under the Criminal Procedure Act adopted by our Criminal Procedure Act, the determination of credibility of the witness’s statement made by the first instance court as to the credibility of the witness’s statement made by the first instance court is clearly erroneous.

Except in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances, the appellate court has judged the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial.