The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the Defendant did not commit an indecent act by wrapping the victim’s hump with his arms and drinking alcohol. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In light of the content of the judgment of the court of first instance and the evidence duly examined in the court of first instance, unless there exist special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance was clearly erroneous, or in view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate trial, the appellate court may not reverse the first instance judgment on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do494, Nov. 24, 2006; 2007Do2020, May 11, 2007; 2009Do14409, Feb. 25, 2010).

The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of the same purport as the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, and found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case against the Defendant, by determining that the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim at the time and place of the instant crime, in full view of various circumstances recognized by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, including the victim’

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the above legal principles, the above judgment of the court below is just, and the result of the party examination alone is as to the credibility of the victim's statement.