A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles merely mean that the Defendant would die of a mother and child, but did not speak against the victim, but did not drink the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure in the criminal trial procedure of the relevant legal principles on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the credibility of the statement should be assessed by taking into account all the circumstances that are difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, including the appearance, attitude, penology, and penology of a witness who is going to make a statement in an open court after being sworn before a judge, as well as whether the content of the statement itself conforms to the rationality, logic, and empirical rule, or conforms to evidence or a third party’s statement.

On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle, so it has an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be considered one of the most important elements in determining credibility of the statement can not be reflected in the evaluation of credibility.

Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the testimony of the witness of the first instance in accordance with the spirit of the principle of direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance was additionally made not later than the time of closing argument