The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, and the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds of the testimony, etc. of E and I without credibility although the Defendant did not arrange for sexual traffic as stated in the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or the first instance court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, unless there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance court clearly erred in the determination of the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the results of the first instance examination and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or in exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is considerably unreasonable solely on the ground that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do12112, Aug. 20, 2009). B.

In light of the above legal principles, E is relatively consistent from the investigative agency to the court below’s trial, which is the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.