The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. With respect to the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding), indecent acts by compulsion, and assault, there is room for doubt as to the credibility of the statement in that the statements of the victims are inconsistent and the content of the statements are inconsistent, and the methods of indecent acts, and the statements of the victim D regarding the negligence and degree of indecent acts are embodied after the lapse of time. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged solely with the statements of the victims.

2. Although the lower court denied the Defendant’s assertion of indecent act by compulsion and assault, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion by recognizing the credibility of the victims’ statements on the grounds of its ruling.

In addition to the following circumstances, the lower court’s determination that found the Defendant guilty of indecent act by compulsion and assault as indicated in its holding is justifiable in that the lower court and the first instance court’s duly adopted and investigated by evidence.

The victim D entered the facts of indecent act by compulsion in the police station on the day of the case in question from the time of the preparation of the written statement, and thereafter made a concrete and consistent statement on the situation at the time of the crime, the part that was committed by indecent act, and the behavior at the time of the defendant

In the court of the court below, the victim D stated that the male-child job victim G was aware of the defendant's indecent act by compulsion, and the victim G also made a statement in the court of the court below that "the victim's sexual act was committed against the male-child group in the course of patroling and getting off the patrol car," and that the victim G knew of the victim's injury to the victim D due to the same circumstance. In light of the above statement, the victim G did not know that the victim D was indecent act against the defendant at the time of the case at the time of arrival of the police station, and it seems to have neglected to hear the fact at the time of the arrival of the police station, and made a statement to the effect that "the defendant considered that the defendant was

A victim G is pre-paid by the victim G.