The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Although there was no fact of deceiving the victim by deceiving the victim, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of a six-month suspended sentence, one year of community service, 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of fact 1) In a case where the Defendant denies the intention, which is a subjective element of the constituent elements of the crime, the criminal intent itself cannot be objectively proved. As such, it is inevitable to prove it by means of proving indirect facts or circumstantial facts relevant to the criminal intent in light of the nature of things

In such a case, what constitutes an indirect or circumstantial fact ought to be determined by a reasonable method of determining the link of facts based on the normal empirical rule with the close observation and analysis capacity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8645, Feb. 23, 2006). In light of the spirit of substantial direct psychologicalism adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance trial was clearly erroneous in light of the spirit of substantial direct psychologicalism adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court by taking account of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of pleadings at the appellate court, the appellate court shall respect the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006, etc.).