The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state that, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant has no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the record reveals that the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months and 2 years of suspended sentence on January 30, 2015 at the Jung-gu District Court on the grounds of violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc., and that the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 7, 2015. Since the crime in the judgment of the court below is a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the above crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) for which the judgment has already become final and conclusive, the sentence shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt the sentence in consideration of equity and the case where the judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained further

However, even if there are such reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's defectiveness or mental disability is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is also considered in this regard.

3. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's defectiveness or mental disability, the defendant is deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime of this case, but in light of the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, the means and method of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant has a lack or weak ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

4. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above ex officio reversal.