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. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding the fact that Defendant 1 was driving a bicycle and driving a bicycle with the front wheels of the bicycle, rather than shocking to the left, Defendant 1 was the front wheels of the bicycle driven by the victim while driving a bicycle and driving a bicycle and driving a bicycle to the left.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the facts charged of this case.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 4 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant tried to overtake the bicycle driven by the victim on the left side at the time and place stated in the facts charged of this case. However, the victim tried to turn to the left side. The defendant tried to turn to the left side of the entrance road installed on the right side of the left side of the right side of the direction of the case. The accident of this case where the victim's bicycle who tried to overtake the victim to the left side was shocked by the defendant's bicycle front part of the defendant's bicycle. The defendant's accident of this case where the victim got to the right side of the victim's bicycle, which caused the accident of this case, caused the damage to the victim's laverization of laver chief executive who needs to be treated for about eight weeks

Meanwhile, the Defendant, on the first trial date of the lower court, led to the confession of the instant facts charged on the trial date, and there is no reasonable circumstance to suspect the credibility of the said confession.

Therefore, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, and there was no error by mistake.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

B. The Defendant’s judgment on each of the unfair sentencing arguments by the Defendant and the Prosecutor would result in a crime of different types (violation of the Trademark Act).