A. In light of the degree of damage of a misunderstanding vehicle, the crossing situation at the time of the accident, etc., since the Defendant entered the intersection by disregarding the E-A-stop signal, it is not a false fact that the Defendant made a false statement about E, and even if not, the Defendant did not have any intention to make a false statement because he had a reasonable reason to believe that E violated the signal.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In determining the assertion of mistake of facts, a report of false facts refers to a conclusive or dolusent recognition and reporting that the reported fact goes against objective facts, and thus, even if it is inconsistent with objective facts, if the reporting person is true and reported as true, the crime of false accusation shall not be established. However, the conviction of truth here is true.

The phrase means a case in which the reporter cannot be aware that the reported fact is false or might be false even if based on the objective fact known to him/her. It does not include a case in which the reporter knows that the reported fact is false or might be false based on objective fact known to him/her, but does not include a case in which he/she considers that his/her assertion is correct without disregarding it.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances, i.e., “E., from the time of the accident to the court below’s decision,” which were duly adopted and investigated by the court below, are as follows: ① The person’s consent from the accident to the court below’s decision, from the private distance of the fisheries market.