The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case in spite of the fact that the victim suffered a misunderstanding of the fact that the victim was the left-hand part of the DNA proposal, but did not have any fact that the victim's left-hand dancing or shakes the victim's left-hand part.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the 500,000 won of fine and the cost of lawsuit) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of assessing 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 determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in light of the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, except in exceptional cases where it is clearly deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is unreasonable considering the first instance court’s results of the first instance examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument of the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by the witness of the first instance on the ground that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement is different from the appellate court’s determination on the first instance court’s determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).