The guilty portion shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four years.

The judgment below

Part of acquittal.

A. Prosecutor 1) Fact-finding [In the facts charged in this case, it is sufficiently proven that there was a consciousness of the Defendant at the time when considering the images of the traffic accident in this case, opinions of doctors, and circumstances after the accident, etc., of the traffic accident in light of the following: (a) misunderstanding of the facts (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the main sentence), the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents) and the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (the injury) on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes), the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents), and the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (the injury)]; and (b) Comparing the past traffic accident due to the expansion of the Defendant's cerebr before and after the accident, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged.

2) In the event that the facts charged in the instant facts charged are indicted as preliminary charges (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (or the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) among the facts charged in the instant case, if the facts charged are found not guilty and the facts charged in the preliminary charges are found guilty, the court below stated the order and reasons of the judgment as to the preliminary facts and explained the reasons for innocence only for the reasons without any need to mention them in the disposition. However, the court below erred by the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment