A. The lower court’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part of acquittal in the original judgment) found the Defendant guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) from among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes). In so doing, the lower court found the Defendant guilty not guilty to have committed intentional act on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and intentional act on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) cannot be viewed as a concept essentially different from the nature and scope of recognition. ② Not only did G, the Defendant, who is the mother of the Defendant remaining at the instant site, did not take a series of measures to remove traffic risks and obstacles to the traffic accident, but also did not change the Defendant’s intentional act and unfair sentencing.

2. Judgment on the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (not guilty portion in the original judgment)

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged