The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the victim’s statement is not consistent with the part concerning the method of indecent act and the situation where the indecent act was committed, and thus, there is no credibility. In light of the circumstances where the Defendant was in a hospital hospitalized in a critical state by his/her spouse, the Defendant was proved without reasonable doubt that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim as described in the facts charged.

It is difficult to see it.

Nevertheless, the court below found the victim guilty of the facts charged only based on the victim's statement, and the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion.

2. Determination

A. The court below convicted the victim of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the victim's statement is specific and consistent, the victim's statement has no motive to make a false statement, the victim's attitude to make a false statement in the court below's trial, etc., and the defendant was in the hospital for the purpose of questioning his/her spouse, and the defendant cannot reject the credibility of the victim's testimony.

B. In light of the spirit of substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance witness was clearly erroneous.

Unless there exist special circumstances to view that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial is clearly unfair, or in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the additional examination of evidence conducted until the closing of pleadings in the appellate trial, the appellate court shall respect the judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). The lower court directly proceed with the procedures for the examination of the witness against the victim as seen earlier.