Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months, and a fine of KRW 9,000,00.

except that this shall not apply.

A. Defendant 1’s mistake: In relation to the lower judgment, the Defendant did not recognize the occurrence of the instant traffic accident.

However, the third judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Improper sentencing: The sentence of the lower court (the first instance court: 1 year of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 7 million won of fine, 2 million won of fine: the second instance court; 6 months of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended sentence, 80 hours of community service, 40 hours of compulsory driving, 40 hours of compulsory driving) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence No. 1 of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the judgment.

In regard to the judgment of the court below, the prosecutor filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court below, and the court of first instance tried at the consolidation of three appeals. Since each of the offenses committed by the court of first instance is concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court of first instance should be sentenced to one punishment in accordance with Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act

Although there is a ground for ex officio reversal, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake as to the third judgment of the lower court is still subject to the judgment of the lower court, and this is examined.

3. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower court also asserted the content as otherwise alleged in this part.

In light of the degree of shock caused by the instant accident, which is verified by a black stuff image, etc. installed on the damaged vehicle, the lower court fully recognized the fact at the time of the instant accident.

The defendant's assertion was rejected on the ground that it was judged.

B. We examine the following circumstances cited by the lower court in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.