The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 8,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (3 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Before making a judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, the statutory penalty for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among the instant crimes is an imprisonment of not more than 10 years pursuant to Article 5-11 of the aforementioned Act or a fine of not less than 5 million won but not more than 30 million won, and thus, if a sentence of a fine of not more than 5 million won is to be imposed on the Defendant, the sentence of a fine of not more than 5 million won should be mitigated pursuant to Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act. However, while the court below sentenced the Defendant to a fine of three million won, it erred in violation of the minimum statutory penalty by omitting the minimum amount of mitigation in the application of the relevant Act while imposing a fine of not more than three million won on the Defendant, so in this regard, the judgment of the court below

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is ruled as follows through pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes concerning the crime, Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, and the selection of fines, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 8 million won) of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2000,000) is that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, and that the vehicle driven by the defendant is covered by the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance and thus the victim is paid insurance money.