The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal does not interfere with the performance of official duties by assaulting the Egressor D.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a witness’s statement in accordance with the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s judgment on the ground that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a witness’s statement was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a witness’s statement was clearly erroneous in light of the evidence examination results of the first instance court and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, and that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a witness’s statement made by the first instance court until the closing of arguments is clearly unreasonable, except in exceptional cases where the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a witness’s statement made by the first instance court is clearly unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313,

In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal of this case at the lower court, and the lower court examined D as a witness, and determined that D’s testimony was credibility on the grounds of its stated reasoning, and convicted him of the facts charged of this case by integrating other evidence than its statement and other evidence.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in comparison with the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment was clearly erroneous in its judgment that credibility was found in D’s testimony at court.

The judgment of the court below on the credibility of the statement shall be maintained.