The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The Defendant, who misleads the Defendant of the summary of the grounds for appeal, deemed the victim from the time of his birth to reflect on the same mind as that of his son and son, and caused a large deal of the lebs.

The term “the victim” refers to the victim’s potter, the drunk center was lost, and the victim was above the victim, and the victim immediately cut the defendant, and the victim did so, and the victim did not commit an indecent act as stated in the judgment of the court below.

However, although there is a possibility that the victim's body was contacted with the victim's body with the victim's body, the defendant did not have the intention to commit an indecent act.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility in accordance with the spirit of substantial direct deliberation adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s decision on the assertion of mistake was clearly erroneous in the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court’s first instance trial.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance trial and the result of further examination of evidence conducted by the time when the court of first instance close the pleading, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). The lower court: (1) The lower court: (a) the victim tried to be placed on the ground of the victim who was seated at the right edge of the court of first instance from the investigative agency to the court of first instance; (b) the victim was trying to have been tried to take the victim into consideration; and (c) the defendant was able to have a negative part of the victim; and (d) the defendant made efforts on the part of the victim.