The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court determined as rejection of prosecution as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents against Victims G, I, J, and K. In so doing, the lower court convicted the victims C and E of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents against the Victims C and E and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents”), and found them guilty. However, only the Defendant filed an appeal against the conviction portion, and the Prosecutor did not file an appeal.

Therefore, among the judgment below, the dismissal of the above dismissal part of the judgment below is transferred to the appellate court in accordance with the principle of no appeal ratio, but that part is already withdrawn from the object of the attack and defense between the parties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004). Thus, the conclusion of the judgment below is to be followed with respect to the dismissal of the above dismissal part, and it is not separately decided by this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The instant accident of mistake of fact was caused by the fault of the driver of Posor vehicle, not by the fault of the Defendant, but by the fault of the driver of Posor vehicle, but by the fault of the lower court recognized the facts charged.

B. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, despite that Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents applies, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby excluding the application of the Special Provision, since the Defendant subscribed to a business liability insurance (Evidence No. 15, hereinafter “instant insurance”) that compensates for KRW 200 million, including the large person and the large person, and all damages suffered by the victims are included in the foregoing insurance limit.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on the assertion of mistake of facts.