The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Considering the fact that the accused committed the instant crime again during the period of suspension of the execution of the same kind of crime even though he/she had been tried for the same kind of crime, strict punishment against the accused is required.

However, considering the fact that the defendant has a depth of his mistake, there is a family to support the defendant, balance in sentencing with the same kind of crime, and other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, and therefore the above argument of the defendant is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts and evidence recognized by the court is 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. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 15530, Mar. 27, 2018); Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;