The judgment below

The part of conviction and attempted fraud shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 ⑴ 사실 오인 내지 법리 오해 ㈎ 피해자 E에 대한 폭행의 점에 대하여 이 부분 공소사실에 부합하는 듯한 피해자 E 및 그의 처 L의 진술에는 신빙성이 없음에도, 이 부분 공소사실을 유죄로 인정한 원심판결에는 채 증 법칙에 위배하여 사실을 오 인한 위법이 있다.

㈏ 피해자 F에 대한 각 폭행의 점에 대하여 1) 피해자 주거지 내에서의 폭행의 점 피해자 F가 직접 작성한 진술서에는 당시 자신을 폭행한 사람은 피고인이 아니라 큰 고모인 M이라고 기재되어 있고, M도 원심 법정에서 당시 자신이 피해자를 폭행하였다고

In light of the fact that the defendant stated, although it is clear that he did not assault the victim at the time and place stated in this part of the facts charged, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged and erred by misapprehending the rules of evidence.

2) The E’s statement that seems consistent with the facts charged in this part of the facts charged is not reliable, and the victim F’s statement that the victim F voluntarily prepared is not the Defendant.

Although this part of the facts charged is written, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by misapprehending the rules of evidence.

3) A assault in a passenger car) The victim F, claiming that the victim was not punished by the victim, is asked by the police to ask the police to determine whether the police officer would be punished against the defendant.

The judgment of the court below which did not render a decision dismissing a public prosecution as to this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of non-violation of an intention in violation of the rules of evidence or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of non-violation of an intention, although it is obvious that the victim expressed his/her intention to punish the defendant clearly and in trust.