A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding or misunderstanding of legal principles, the defendant cannot be deemed to have inflicted an injury on the victim by using dangerous articles, etc.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On July 28, 2015, around 09:20 on July 28, 2015, the Defendant: (a) made a judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the allegation of mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine; (b) on July 21, 2015, on the ground that the Defendant was unable to operate the Defendant’s vehicle on the ground that he was in the instant F, which is a dangerous object, based on the provisional disposition prohibiting the transfer of vehicle occupation, on July 21, 2015, the Seoul Central District Court 2015KaMo 805870, which was the employee of Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Defendant was deprived of the victim’s vehicle as the front part of the said vehicle; and (c) continued to be led by the victim’s back part of the said vehicle, leading the victim’s will to the victim, and was in need of medical treatment for about 14 days.

2) In full view of the evidence in the judgment below, the court below held that the defendant was aware that he could inflict an injury on the victim, but it could be seen that the defendant driven a motor vehicle towards the victim and was sufficient to cause a danger to his life or body due to the operation of the motor vehicle by the victim or a third party.

In light of the facts charged, the charges were convicted.

3) “Dangerous article” under Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act, which is a judgment of the political party, includes all articles that can be widely used to inflict harm on human life and body even if they are not deadly weapons. Whether a certain article constitutes “Dangerous article” can be seen as causing harm to human life or body by either the other party or a third party when using the article in light of social norms in a specific case.