2. The defendant still asserts that the bus stop cannot be deemed a bus stop pursuant to Article 32 subparagraph 4 of the Road Traffic Act even when the judgment of the court below was made in the first instance. However, the court remanded the case from the court of final appeal to the court of final appeal, unless there is a change in the factual and legal relationship, which is the basis of the final judgment, after remanding the case, with respect to the factual and legal judgment on the grounds of reversal, provided new evidence during the deliberation process, and without any change in the evidential relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10572, Apr. 9, 2009). Thus, the court below's appeal against the judgment of the court below prior to the remand that acquitted the defendant against the defendant, and the legislative purport of the above provision is to prevent inconvenience or danger that may arise to passengers using a means of public transportation, and to ensure smooth operation of the bus, and thus, the court below's judgment of final appeal is reversed and remanded to the court below that there was no special reason for the defendant's new bus stop or rejection against the Incheon airport's will.

[B] The defendant and his defense counsel are above the circular bus stop of this case in this court after the deadline for submitting the reason for appeal expires.