A. The Defendant claiming a misunderstanding of facts is merely a fact that the victim gets off from a taxi operated by the victim, and the Defendant did not assault the victim or inflict bodily injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case, including the time when the said taxi is in operation.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the ground of unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may be recognized as having inflicted an injury on, or inflicted an injury on, the victim as stated in the instant facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

1) From October 23, 2013 to the trial of the police, the victim was “the apartment of the case in which the defendant was aboard the taxi he operated (hereinafter “the instant taxi”) before the Cheongju bus Terminal around October 23, 2013 and the defendant was on board the taxi (hereinafter “the instant taxi”).

Ro I tried to do so.

The defendant got off the defendant in the vicinity of the apartment house of this case and the credit card was built.

After the payment of charges, the Defendant left the taxi of this case, and again gets on and off the taxi of this case, “I am off, I am off the taxi of this case. I am off as I am. I am. I am. I am. while driving the taxi of this case, I am. I am. I am 2-3 times back from the back seat and am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am back the taxi of this case. I am. I am.

He set up the instant taxi in the vicinity of the apartment building of this case at the request of the defendant and set up the instant taxi, and the defendant also set up the instant taxi.