The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Incheon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In light of the contents of the judgment of the court of first instance and the evidence duly examined in the court of first instance, unless there exist special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance was clearly erroneous, or in view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate trial, it is remarkably unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance, the appellate court shall not reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance is different from the judgment of the appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Nov. 30, 2009; 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006).

The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that “the Defendant, around September 2, 201, demanded the payment of the victim D’s management expenses in front of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Ctel 903 around September 15:0, 201, by hand, killed the victim’s flaps and assaulted the victim once.”

On the other hand, the defendant alleged that the defendant was self-defense as a defensive act to escape from violence of the victim and F, although he had a breath of dub around the date and time stated in the facts charged.

However, in the first instance trial, the victim appeared as a witness, and the defendant fatdddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

B. The first instance court, which directly examined the victim as a witness, has credibility in the victim’s partial statement in light of the overall evidence duly examined.