The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. With regard to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, although the Defendant did not have abused a child as stated in this part of the facts charged, and thereby convicted the Defendant of this part.

2. The judgment of the court below is not denied that the court below duly adopted and examined the evidence and the circumstances recognized by it, in particular, ① the background of the crime in this part and the statement of the person who was in the process thereof are consistent and considerably specific, ② the defendant's own order to send the victimized child at the time is acknowledged, and ② the defendant's own order to send the victimized child at the time is acknowledged, and the defendant's "in this process, a fluencing voice by a conspiracy of fake (487 evidence records 68 pages of the judgment of the court below)" or "a fluencing that a flussity could have occurred," and the defendant's statement was stated in the court below (the second trial date of the court below). ③ The gist of the defendant's appeal was that the victimized child's fluencing nature, and that the flusssssium was fluencing, and the defendant's other flusium's flusium was not misunderstandingd by the defendant's argument.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.