A. The Defendant, by agreement with F, prepared a letter of confirmation with F, affixed the F with a seal on the said letter, but did not forge the said letter, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s confession at the court of first instance as to the assertion of mistake of facts alone is not likely to have the probative value or credibility of the confession, solely on the grounds that the confession at the court of appeal differs from the legal statement in the appellate court.

In determining the credibility of confessions, the credibility of confessions should be determined in consideration of the following: (a) the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below can be comprehensively revealed; (b) the defendant confessions from the third trial date with the assistance of a private legal counsel in the court of the court of the court of the first and second trial; and (c) the date of pronouncement for agreement with F after the date of the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the first instance was designated; (d) the defendant made a motion for postponement of the date of pronouncement for agreement with F. The defendant appears to have sufficiently known the meaning of confessions from the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the first instance; and (e) whether there is any conflict or inconsistency with the confessions among other evidence than the confessions (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2556, Apr. 29, 2010).