The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On March 27, 2019, the Defendant, at the time of undergoing a close inspection at the Central Physical Examination Center, notified the intention of the Defendant of the fact that the Defendant was correct by drid, and attached bareboat to protect the upper part of the left hand hand hand, and did not engage in a fraudulent act for the purpose of evading military service or having military service reduced. Thus, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, when determining the credibility of a confession of the relevant legal doctrine, the determination should be made by taking into account all the circumstances, including whether the content of the confession statement itself is objectively reasonable, what is the motive or reason for the confession, what is the background leading up to the confession, and whether there is any conflict or inconsistency with the confession among circumstantial evidence other than confessions. Furthermore, in a case where the defendant consistently led to the confession from the investigative agency to the trial date, and reversed his own confession from a certain trial date, in addition to examining the credibility of the confession, the motive, reason, and circumstance leading up to the reversal of the confession, as well as the motive, reason, and circumstance leading up to the reversal of the confession in light of the statements made by the investigative agency after the reversal of the confession, and whether there is any supporting evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do17869, Oct. 13, 2016). 2)