A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

2. In full view of the arguments of this case and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and environment, social relation, etc., the lower court’s punishment seems to be unreasonable, since it appears that the Defendant’s punishment was unreasonable, it appears that the Defendant’s improper assertion for sentencing is justified, since it was unfair, since it was deemed that the Defendant’s punishment was unreasonable, as it was based on the following: (a) the Defendant led to the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime for more than three months; (b) the Defendant was punished in excess of the fine for the same crime;

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled after pleading.

【The grounds for the judgment in its entirety 【The facts constituting a crime and the summary of evidence admitted by the court below 】 1. The gist of the facts constituting a crime and the summary of evidence is as follows: (a) the defendant’s partial statement “1. Defendant’s own trial statement” is changed to “the Defendant’s own trial statement” as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below; and (b) thus, they are

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. An order to attend a course under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;