A. The defendant has not inflicted any injury on the victim in mistake of facts.

B. Even if the conviction of unfair sentencing is recognized, the sentence of the lower court (one million won of a fine) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument of mistake of facts: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below; (b) the victim resisted from the investigative agency to the court below that he would refuse to take passengers, and (c) the victim opened a door behind the driver's seat to the back of the driver's seat and stated consistently that he would open a door behind the back of the driver's seat and made his face to the back of the driver's seat; (b) the victim reported to the investigative agency immediately after the case, and submitted a written diagnosis to the investigation agency; (c) the victim reported that he did not take the victim's seat to the destination; (d) the victim did not get the victim's consent to the destination; and (e) the victim did not get off the taxi after obtaining the victim's consent; and (e) the victim did not get off the taxi from the vehicle to the destination; and (e) the defendant believed that he was difficult to take the victim's seat but it was difficult to accept the victim's request from the prosecutor's office.

In full view of the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, if the victim asserts that it was appropriate for the defendant to obtain from the defendant because there were other reasons that the victim did not obtain from the defendant, it appears to be an exceptional day.