A. The defendant of mistake of facts is merely about the victim's attempt to get home, and there is no fact that the victim was faced with the victim's head at the time and place of the decision of the court below as stated in the facts charged in this case, and at the same time and place as indicated in the facts charged in this case.

The judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant by reliance on the victim's statement even though the victim's statement is not reliable, has an error of law affecting the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the relevant legal principles, the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of assessing the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or, in exceptional cases where it is clearly deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is unreasonable considering the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted until the closing of argument in the appellate court, the appellate court shall not reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006; 2008Do42314, Jul. 29, 2010).