The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) is that the Defendant did not threaten the victim as stated in the facts charged, on the grounds that the victim was not the victim at the time of committing the crime.

2. Determination

A. In light of the relevant legal principles and the public trial-oriented principle, comprehensively considering the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of argument in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s judgment as to the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance, unless there are exceptional cases deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14409, Feb. 25, 2010).

The defendant in this case also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the defendant's above assertion and found the defendant guilty of the facts charged against the defendant in detail, with detailed explanation of the decision.

In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, i.e., (i) the victim B's investigative agency and court, which correspond to the facts charged in this case, are specific and consistent, (ii) the witness E's statement in the court of the court below, (iii) there is no circumstance that E's statement conforms to the victim's statement, and there is no circumstance that E makes a false statement unfavorable to the defendant, and (iv) the photograph of the defendant after the victim was threatened by the defendant as stated in the facts charged, unlike the defendant's defense that the victim did not have any record on the day of this case, the court below's above determination that the defendant threatened the victim, as shown in the facts charged, is just, and contrary to the judgment of the court below.