The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victims.

B. Since having undergone a traffic accident in around 2008, the Defendant suffered from physical and mental illness, such as neutronism, post-distance stress disorder, depression, collision adjustment disorder, etc. Around June 21, 2017, the Defendant was suffering from a mental therapy due to sexual neutism.

The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes in a state of mental disorder caused by the foregoing physical and mental disease.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure in the criminal trial procedure of a mistake of facts, not only is it consistent with the rationality, logic, and empirical rule itself, but also with evidence or a third party’s statement in the presence of a judge, but also the appearance or attitude of a witness who is employed in the statement in the open court after being sworn at the presence of a judge, and the protocol of witness examination, such as the pen of the witness, the pen of the statement, etc., which is difficult to record, shall be evaluated as credibility by directly observing various circumstances that are difficult to record.

On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle, so it has an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be considered one of the most important elements in determining credibility of the statement can not be reflected in the evaluation of credibility.

Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court's method of evaluating the credibility of the witness's statement of the first instance court in accordance with the spirit of the principle of direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act.