The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, when determining the credibility of a statement made by a sexual indecent act victim submitted as evidence at an investigative agency, considering the following: (a) the child’s age, how much the child’s age is, how much after the occurrence of the case, how much the child’s statement was made after the lapse of the time of the occurrence of the case, and how the guardian or investigator who first heard the facts of the child’s damage in the course of the process of the occurrence of the case until the statement was made, or how the investigator would cause a change to children’s memory by providing information other than facts, or inducing a specific answer through repeated interrogation, etc., whether there is a repeated question that may be mistaken at the time of the statement; (b) whether the child’s statement was affected by the inquirer; (c) whether the child’s statement was made without any influence from the interviewr; and (d) what kind of statements were made in the court; and (d) whether the content of the case’s statement should be reviewed in a comprehensive manner including a detailed description and detailed description about the child’s.

(Supreme Court Decision 2012Do3893, 2012Do14, 2012Do83 Decided June 14, 2012). According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court held that the Defendant, who is the fourth-class teacher of an elementary school, was guilty of committing an indecent act by force by putting the panty upper part of the chest or the part on the part of the mother, who was the fourth-class teacher of an elementary school, 10 years old, under the body punishment during class hours, or by putting the knife with knife with knife with knife with knife with knife with knife with knife with knife.