A. The lower court convicted the Defendant by misunderstanding the facts, which led to the mistake of facts, only made a false confession that the Defendant had committed a crime, and did not have any fact when the victim was committed at the end of the person who was aware that he may be released if agreed with the victim.

B. Even if the lower court found the Defendant guilty of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and the court below and the court below acknowledged the crime two times at the time of the prosecutor's investigation by denying the crime at the time of the first investigation by the prosecutor's office, and dismissing the request for examination of legality of detention (after the prosecutor's office's examination of legality of detention did not release the defendant by the decision of dismissal), which is contrary to the purpose of the defendant's assertion (or because the witness was not released, the prosecutor's office should have also denied the crime if the defendant alleged that the defendant committed the crime was committed) in consideration of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated: < Amended by Act No. 1060, Dec. 23, 2007>