Based on your true inductive bias, in theory it's better to use hierarchical classification.
In the field of machine learning, hierarchical classification is sometimes referred to as instance space decomposition, which splits a complete multi-class problem into a set of smaller classification problems.
A concrete example is described in Redmon et al's “YOLO9000: Better, Faster, Stronger” (2017). In your case the idea is that before training the model you propagate the labels of your class 2 and 3 to their parent, say, as label 1' which is a sibling of your label 1, then you train a multi-label classifier on such label-transformed tree-like data of multiple levels where you enforce mutual exclusion constraint at each level. In your case it will perform hierarchical classification to predict a set of labels at just two levels of abstraction. Also in this way you can also hedge your bet to reject decision if the probability threshold to further classify label 2&3 is low.
Hierarchical classification. ImageNet labels are pulled from WordNet, a language database that structures concepts and how they relate. In WordNet, “Norfolk terrier” and “Yorkshire terrier” are both hyponyms of “terrier” which is
a type of “hunting dog”, which is a type of “dog”, which is a “canine”, etc. Most approaches to classification assume a flat structure to the labels however for combining datasets, structure is exactly what we need... The final result is WordTree, a hierarchical model of visual concepts. To perform classification with WordTree we predict conditional probabilities at every node for the probability of each hyponym of that synset given that synset... Using the same training parameters as before, our hierarchical Darknet-19 achieves 71.9% top-1 accuracy and 90.4% top-5 accuracy.
Finally even if you still decide to use a flat classifier, it's not a good way to simply report the index with the highest probability to be your class. Assuming no test data shifts, at least you need to implement temperature scaling or other calibration techniques to ensure the softmax probabilities are well-calibrated and reflective of true confidence based on your validation set. Temperature scaling empirically produces the lowest expected calibration error (ECE) on a variety of DNN classification problems and is much simpler and faster than other methods.