The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors) did not have committed an act of disturbance by leaving the military court in large interest at the time of the instant case.

The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts that affected the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in accordance with the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s judgment on the ground that the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or that the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is clearly unreasonable in full view of the evidence examination results conducted in the first instance court and the result of additional examination by the time the argument of the appellate court is concluded until the closing of arguments (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).

The court below judged that the credibility of the above D's statement is recognized when examining the witness of the police officer D at the time of dispatch, and considering other evidence duly examined, the court below convicted the defendant.

According to the records of this case, there is no circumstance to see that the judgment of the court below which believed the above D's statement was clearly erroneous, and there was no additional evidence examination in the trial court. Thus, the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case does not seem to have erred by misconception of facts as pointed out by the defendant, which affected the conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

However, the judgment of the court below.