The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground of the victim and I’s statement, which lacks credibility due to lack of consistency, merely twice the victim H (hereinafter “victim”)’s head on several occasions in the context of a decoration, on the ground that the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground of the victim and I’s statement, even though there was no consistency in the victim’s head.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial as to the assertion of facts, the degree of the formation of a conviction for finding a guilty guilty should not be limited to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts. The rejection of evidence acknowledged as probative value by causing a suspicion without a reasonable ground is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do1335, Sept. 13, 1994). The mere fact that the statement of a witness is consistent with its main part, such as where the statement of a witness is inconsistent with its main part, the credibility of the statement is not arbitrarily denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008). The defendant complies with the logical and empirical rule, including the victim’s testimony or witness evidence before the court below’s testimony or witness examination, after considering the victim’s head’s testimony or witness testimony, and it conforms with the witness’s own testimony or witness examination procedure.