The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine) is that the Defendant only scam even in the process of returning the victim who scam to himself/herself, and there was no fact that the victim scams or scams downs the part of the victim.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which found the defendant guilty, and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure, not only is it consistent with the rationality, logic, inconsistency, or rule of experience of the content of the statement itself, but also is consistent with the witness evidence or third party’s statement in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance, attitude, and penology of the witness who is going to the witness statement in the open court after being sworn before a judge, and the witness statement in the witness examination protocol, such as the penology, appearance of the statement, shall be evaluated by directly observing all the circumstances that are difficult to record.

On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle. Thus, in determining credibility of the statement, there is an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be called 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 methods of evaluating credibility between the first instance court and the appellate court, the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court.

The credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is determined in full view of the results of the first examination of evidence and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial.