The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel (fact-finding) was that the Defendant merely carried the E in the box where the Defendant, who is a substitute driver, tried to drive by overspeed and did so, and did not say that the Defendant “dial-a-a-dial performance” was “dial performance” to E, or that the Defendant committed indecent act by force by force, by hand, rhumbucks and rh

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged on the grounds of the testimony of E without credibility.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant is a person operating a horse d vehicle, and the victim E (V, 49 years old) is a proxy driver.

Around 01:50 on June 20, 2015, the Defendant was assigned a substitute driver to the call center to drive a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol before the G Recycling Center, which was located in the G Recycling Center in the city F, and the victim was assigned a substitute driver at around 02:0 on the same day.

The Defendant said that the victim was seated in the driver’s seat of the vehicle, and rhumbucks and routs to the right side of the victim’s right side by hand, and only once the victim’s right chest side was met.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed an indecent act on the part of the victim.

B. The judgment of the court below is consistent with the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, i.e., ① the defendant made a statement from the investigative agency to the purport that she would be "dial-a-a-the-job" when she goes on board in the situation where she was a proxy driver, and she also made the statement. The above statement about the specific circumstance is highly reliable, and if she wishes to dismiss she, she cannot be seen to have sent a false statement about the situation at the place where she had a third party, she was born the defendant, and she received E's phone number by sending the defendant.