A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the said taxi was in driving at the time of assaulting the victim D in the taxi driven by the victim D, even though the said taxi was in driving at the time, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (two-year imprisonment) of the lower court is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable, since the Defendant was a taxi driver at the time of assaulting the victim D.

① Comprehensively taking account of the statements made by the victim’s investigative agency and the court below at the court below, the victim’s statement, “The defendant and two women working in the day were to board the taxi in the vicinity of the Gandong in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City and to the New Kandong, the destination of which is the destination. At the same time, the defendant was demanded from the defendant to purchase tobacco, and even thereafter, the defendant was in a dispute with the defendant to make anti-end and bathing, and the defendant was able to take her hand and her hand, and the defendant was to take her hand and her hand. At the same time, the taxi was transferred to the alley with convenience points above the road, which was not a stop at the time. After that time, the woman, who was the defendant’s day to set a taxi in the front of the convenience point, she was trying to take a tobacco from the taxi, and the defendant also tried to do so at her own convenience. The defendant was also trying to report the situation at her own police station.”

(2014 Highest 906 Evidence records 157, 162, 163, 188 pages, 73-77 pages of trial records). Such victims are the victims.