The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The Defendant, who is the head of D (hereinafter “instant convenience store”) located in C at the time of spreading the gist of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), committed an indecent act by force against the victim E (hereinafter “victim”) who is an employee of the above convenience store, as stated in the facts constituting the crime Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of the lower judgment.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted all of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall evaluate the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc., taking into account all the circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance and attitude of the witness, and the penance of the statements made by the witness in the open court after taking an oath before a judge, as well as in compliance with the rationality, logic, contradiction, or rule of experience of the contents of the statements themselves, or the third party's statements. The court shall not dismiss the statements made by the witness, including the victim, without permission, unless there is any other evidence that objectively deemed credibility, in light of the aforementioned legal principles as stated in the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 209; 2004Do362, Apr. 15, 2005; 2012Do63612, Feb. 21, 2012).