The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In a case where it is proved that there is a difference between the victim in the indictment and the victim in the indictment as stated in the indictment, the identity of the charges shall not be undermined, and the victim shall be found guilty by pointing out the victim other actually than the victim in the indictment ex officio without the amendment of indictment procedure unless it actually gives a disadvantage to the defendant's right of defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do2168, Dec. 22, 1987; 2001Do686, Aug. 23, 2002). Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the above legal principles and records, the court below acknowledged that the victim in the crime in this case was D, and it is just to have found the victim guilty of the charges in this case by pointing out D, other than G, without the amendment procedure, for reasons that the victim would harm the identity of the charges or would not have a substantial disadvantage in exercising the defendant's right of defense, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there is no violation of law by exceeding the bounds of

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.