The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

The defendant shall be 40 hours.

1. The lower court, among the facts charged in the instant case, convicted the Defendant of the scope of the trial at the lower court and the summary of the judgment.

Since only the defendant appealed against the guilty portion, the fact of assault (Dismissal of Public Prosecution) was separated and confirmed as it is.

Therefore, only the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below falls under the scope of the judgment of the court below.

The grounds of appeal are as follows: “The Defendant erred by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles in part of the judgment of the lower court (Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the lower court)” and “the punishment of the lower court (three years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.”

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (Article 1 of the original judgment)

A. The key facts charged in this part of the facts charged (Article 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance) are that the Defendant “the victims of the speech are all the parents of the Defendant. Of the victims for convenience, the first married of the Defendant is called “the victim of the speech,” and the second married is called “the victims of the birth.” On two occasions, the Defendant committed indecent act by force on one occasion by force of the victims of the birth.”

This part of the issue is whether or not there is admissibility and probative value as follows.

1) Direct evidence that corresponds to this part of the facts charged lies in ① the suspect interrogation protocol of the Defendant and the suspect interrogation protocol of the Defendant, ② the police protocol of the victims, ③ the video recordings (including the video recordings) of the victims conducted by the prosecution. ② In the case of the suspect interrogation protocol of the Defendant against the Defendant, the Defendant cannot be admitted as evidence of guilt since he denied its contents.

In the case of the suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant, since the defendant denies the authenticity of considerable parts, it cannot be used as evidence of guilt.

The judgment of the court below was not used as evidence of guilt.

(2) The victims shall have the victims, two times in the police (record of statement) and in the prosecution (record of video recording and recording of video recording).