The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Of the facts charged in this case, the court below rendered a judgment dismissing this part of the prosecution on the ground that the victim E had expressed his wish not to prosecute the defendant after instituting the prosecution, and since the prosecutor's failure to appeal separately became final and conclusive without filing an appeal, the above assault shall be excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no particular evidence to find the Defendant guilty of each of the facts charged of this case concerning victim D, in addition to the statement of the victim with no credibility.

However, the court below erred by finding the victim guilty of each of the above charges only with the statement of the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the 4 years of suspended sentence on the 2nd and June) is too heavy.

3. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of fact, the probative value of evidence is left to a judge’s free judgment, but such judgment must be consistent with logical and empirical rules, and the degree of the formation of a conviction to find a defendant guilty in a criminal trial is to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence which is recognized as probative value is not permitted beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The expression “reasonable doubt” refers to a reasonable doubt about the probability of a fact inconsistent with the facts that is not included in all questions and correspondences, but in accordance with logical and empirical rules, it should be based on the sexual reasoning that is grasped in relation to the recognition of facts that are favorable to the defendant, and thus, it is not a conceptual doubt or doubt merely.