The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 120 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victim D by mistake of facts appeared in the court of the court below and reversed the victim's statement to the investigation agency. In accordance with the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of substantial direct trial, credibility should be recognized in the victim D's legal statement.

Nevertheless, the court below rejected the victim D's legal statement in the court below, and found the victims guilty of all the charges of this case on the basis of each statement made by the investigative agency. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court’s judgment, the lower court determined that each statement made by the victims at an investigative agency includes not only the specific and detailed contents, but also the contents that it is difficult for them to take care of without actual experience, and the victims to have a common experience are consistent with each other, and it is difficult for them to find reasonable grounds for the victims to be friendly. On the other hand, the victim’s statement at the lower court is recognized credibility, while it is difficult to believe that the victim’s statement at the lower court is not supported by a reasonable explanation on the details of the statement at the police station, the circumstances surrounding the statement at the police station, and it is difficult to believe that it is difficult to support the victim’s statement at the lower court’s discretion, and it is deemed that the victim’s statement at the lower court is guilty all of the facts charged in the instant case.

2) Articles 307(1) and 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act provide that the probative value of evidence shall be based on evidence, and the probative value of evidence shall be based on the discretion of the judge. This is the necessary evidence among the evidence admitted by the judge.