Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A 15 million won, Defendant B.

A. As to the facts charged in this case, Defendant A, B, and Defendant D, who had a contact with the co-Defendant D with the co-defendant, as to the mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misunderstanding the fact that the Defendants recognized the joint principal offender of the crime of negligence.

2) The sentence of the lower court (Defendant A: one year of imprisonment with prison labor, two years of suspended sentence, Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor, eight months of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant D (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (an amount of KRW 5 million) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A and B’s assertion of misunderstanding of the legal principles, the term “crime” in Article 30 of the Criminal Act is an intentional crime and a criminal negligence is not high. Thus, if two or more persons have committed a crime through their communication with each other, a joint principal offender of a criminal negligence is established (see Supreme Court Decision 79Do1249, Aug. 21, 1979, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, (a) Defendant B is an employee of the joint Defendant C corporation (hereinafter “C”) who was awarded a contract for construction and civil works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) among the H University H University H University H University H H H horse practice construction works, and (b) Defendant C’s joint principal offender and joint seal among the instant construction works are employees of the instant joint owner of the instant vehicle, and thus, Defendant C, who is an employee of the instant construction works and the instant joint owner of the instant vehicle.

Defendant B, A, and joint Defendant D are in charge of filing a complaint.