The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant: (a) made an unfair and unreasonable demand by the victim; and (b) made the victim’s false demand, and thereby, said request was the end of the trial decision and did not have an intention to insult the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) With respect to a witness’s assertion of fact, the degree of formation of a conviction for finding a guilty verdict in a criminal trial should not be enough to hold a reasonable doubt. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence recognized as probative value by causing a suspicion without a reasonable ground is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do1335, Sept. 13, 1994). The witness’s statement is inconsistent in the main part, solely on the ground that the witness’s statement is not somewhat consistent with the witness’s statement, the credibility of the statement is not arbitrarily denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008). In addition, the court below’s determination of credibility of the witness’s statement in the appellate trial based on the spirit of substantial direct examination and evidence adopted by our Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the principle of public trial based on evidence examination by the appellate court.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see, or in full view of the results of the examination of evidence at the court below and the results of the additional examination of evidence conducted up to the closing of oral arguments, maintaining the judgment of the court below as to the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the court below is clearly unfair, the appellate court shall be