The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The first instance court found the Defendant not guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 300,000,000, recognizing the Defendant guilty of assault.

However, since only the defendant appealed from the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground of mistake of facts, and the prosecutor did not appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, and the above acquittal became final and conclusive, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of first instance.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, due to the victim C, made a false name of a sexual indecent act, and fluencing a magazine in the process of protesting against this, he/she did not assault the victim’s body in his/her hand.

3. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly unreasonable in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted until the closing of arguments in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse the first instance judgment on the grounds that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).