The judgment below

Acquittal shall be reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge is acquitted. The judgment of the court below is reversed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the instant charges, misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles (with respect to the acquittal portion), the charge of inflicting an injury on carrying dangerous goods among the facts charged in the instant case (the name of the crime in this part of the facts charged is special damage, and the applicable legal provisions were modified to Articles 258-2(1) and 257(1) of the Criminal Act) cannot be deemed to be the same as the crime of damaging property for which a summary order has become final and conclusive. However, the lower court assessed each of the above crimes as identical facts and rendered a acquittal on the ground that the withdrawal of a request for formal trial as to the above summary order affects this part of the facts charged, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

2. The judgment of the court below as to the injury to carry dangerous articles (not guilty of the judgment below)

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for an ex officio appeal, the prosecutor examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for the appeal, and the prosecutor applied the name of the crime as "special injury", and applied the applicable law to "Article 3 (1), Article 2 (1) 3, and Article 257 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act" with regard to "Article 258-2 (1) and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" respectively, and applied for amendments to the indictment with regard to "Article 258-2 (1) and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act," and since this court was subject to the judgment upon permission, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the prosecutor's mistake and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the injury to carry dangerous articles still are subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. Determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant on January 29, 2015.