The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) did not constitute an indecent act against the victims, and the contents of the complaint against the victim I and K are not false.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by erroneous determination that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court affirmed all of the facts charged and rejected the Defendant’s allegation based on the evidence employed by the lower court.

B. 1) In light of the spirit of substantial direct deliberation under the Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance trial, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial was clearly erroneous in its determination.

Unless there exist extenuating circumstances to view that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is significantly unfair, or considering the results of the first instance trial and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of pleadings, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial differs from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do2551, Apr. 15, 2016). B) In determining the credibility of a statement made by a victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall assess the credibility of the statement by considering all the circumstances, such as the reasonableness, logic, inconsistency, or rule of experience, or conformity with the evidence or the third party’s statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do7917, Jan. 30, 209).