The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the victim of misunderstanding of facts was sealed, he did not look at sexual scams and scams.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the spirit of substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, unless there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or in view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional examination of evidence conducted by the time the closing of argument in the appellate trial, maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly unreasonable, the appellate court should respect the determination on the credibility of the statement made

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994 Decided November 24, 2006, etc.). Defendant asserted the same as the grounds for appeal of this case at the lower court. The lower court directly examined D, E, etc. as a witness and deemed credibility, and based on other evidence duly adopted and examined in the statement, rejected Defendant’s assertion, and convicted Defendant by recognizing the fact that the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim.

In light of the circumstances revealed in the records and arguments of this case, there are special circumstances to deem that the lower court’s determination of credibility concerning the statement by the witness of the lower court was clearly erroneous.

The judgment of the court below is not remarkably unfair or it is not reasonable to maintain its judgment as it is, and it is reasonable to accept the judgment of the court below by comparing it with evidence, and therefore, the mistake of facts by the

B. In full view of the various sentencing conditions and the fact that the Defendant did not recognize the error in the records and arguments of the instant case, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.