2. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant, around 21:10 on December 24, 201, the defendant was trying to open a door to the damaged driver's seat of the damaged vehicle according to the stop signal on the ground that the defendant's vehicle and the damaged vehicle stopped in accordance with the stop signal on the ground that the driver's vehicle driven at the right line at the right line (the above C's father's H ownership of the above C's H) did not yield the vehicle while driving the EM vehicle in Seocho-gu Seoul at the right line, at around 21:10 on December 24, 201, the defendant tried to open a door to the damaged vehicle's front side. However, according to the fact that the defendant's vehicle cannot be seen as being damaged by the driver's vehicle's vehicle's harming the damaged vehicle's front side of the damaged vehicle, and the defendant's vehicle's vehicle "after finding the damage on the roof of the vehicle without delay.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

(However, in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the first crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below is corrected as follows: "The amount of a DNA car driven by the victim C" to "the amount of a DNA car driven by the victim H" of the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below.