A. When comprehensively taking account of the situation in which the Defendant was suffering from a traffic accident at the time of the occurrence of the traffic accident, or the site pictures, videos screen pictures, etc. submitted as evidence by the lower court, it is obvious that the victim, rather than the Defendant and the Defendant, was engaged in an intentional and excessive retaliation driving, or committed an intentional accident with intent to receive the insurance money, due to the emotional distress after the Defendant and the Defendant was punished.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which concluded that the defendant committed a crime in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents was erroneous and adversely affected the judgment.

B. The sentence of a fine of KRW 500,000 imposed on the Defendant by the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the victim D’s legal testimony in the court below, the CD image screen of the bus, and the medical certificate, etc., the victim’s investigation agency and the court below’s legal statement on the essential part of the situation and damage situations before and after the occurrence of the accident are relatively consistent and specific, and the victim’s motor vehicle is used as a substitute for other evidence. Ultimately, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant received the victim’s motor vehicle due to the same circumstance as the criminal facts in the original trial and caused the victim’s injury for about two weeks.

(A) As alleged by the Defendant, the Defendant’s appeal is not accepted, since it is not deemed that the victim was in motioned driving or was engaged in the planned scambling for the malicious purpose of acquiring insurance money.

There are some circumstances that may consider the motive and background of the instant crime, the degree of damage is relatively minor, the Defendant’s vehicle was admitted to the bus mutual aid association, and the Defendant is the primary offender who has no penal power.