2. According to the records, at the beginning of the original trial, F confirmed the vehicle number when the Defendant drives the vehicle immediately after the instant case, and stated that the Defendant was placed at the 112 reported telephone, thereby leaving the Defendant’s vehicle number. On the same day, F identified the Defendant as a person who reported the Defendant’s driver’s license photograph at the police on the day, and was engaged in obscene conduct as stated in the facts charged. The Defendant also acknowledged the fact that the Defendant driven the same vehicle at the instant location around the instant time.

In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles regarding F’s statement in determining the guilty of facts charged, based on the belief that F’s statement was specifically and consistent, and that F did not have any motive for false accusation.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.