A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles on August 14, 201, the Defendant was assaulted by D at the Defendant’s Eastern’s home on the same day. Therefore, even though the Defendant’s accusation was not false, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the charge against the Defendant by reliance on the testimony and text messages without credibility.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluation of credibility in accordance with the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the principle of court-oriented trial, the lower court determined that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly unreasonable in full view of the evidence examination results in the first instance court and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, and that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is clearly unreasonable, the appellate court should not reverse the first instance judgment on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance differs from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).