" Hall v. State, 162 Ga. App. 713, 715-716 ( 293 S.E.2d 862) (1982). Accord Lecounte v. State, 183 Ga. App. 407, 408 (2) ( 359 S.E.2d 193) (1987). Judgment affirmed. Carley, P. J., and Johnson, J., concur.

Further, the corroboration may be by circumstantial evidence. Lecounte v. State, 183 Ga. App. 407 ( 359 S.E.2d 193). Considering the evidence in this case, we are satisfied that the accomplice's testimony was sufficiently corroborated. A motion for a directed verdict of acquittal should be granted only when there is no conflict in evidence and the evidence with all reasonable deductions and inferences therefrom demands a verdict of acquittal as a matter of law.

Moreover, the defendant presented testimony which tended to substantiate his version of events and discredit the accomplice. Although corroboration may be by circumstantial evidence, LeCounte v. State, 183 Ga. App. 407 (2) ( 359 S.E.2d 193) (1987), "[t]he evidence must do more than merely cast a grave suspicion of guilt on the accused." Powell v. State, 166 Ga. App. 393, 394 ( 304 S.E.2d 515) (1983).

Slight corroboration of the evidence is sufficient. Bryant v. State, 179 Ga. App. 653 ( 347 S.E.2d 301) (1986)." Lecounte v. State, 183 Ga. App. 407 ( 359 S.E.2d 193) (1987); McCoy v. State, 185 Ga. App. 221 (2) ( 363 S.E.2d 628) (1987). In the present case, the accomplice testified that he arrived in Georgia from New York on October 11, 1986, to visit the defendant, a distant relative.