A. At the time of the misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in this case, even though there was no occupational negligence on the part of the Defendant in the front side of the road in the course of preventing the Defendant from driving the instant sloping by driving the instant sloping. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence (two years of suspended execution and 80 hours of community service in June) against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument of mistake of facts. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below. ① The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, consistently requested the victim to keep the instant sloping from the rear side of the instant sloping, using the sloping to make the Defendant unsloping, and in response to this request, the defendant sloping the sloping of the instant sloping to keep the instant sloping to keep the instant sloping in the front side of the instant sloping, while the victim was not pushed down with the instant sloping, while the sloping was in the back side of the instant sloping, and the sloping was in the back of the instant sloping, and the Defendant was in the back of the instant sloping and the instant sloping to have the instant sloping and the instant sloping.”