The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 50,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In a formal trial following a request for a formal trial against a trial decision, the lower court sentenced a fine exceeding KRW 60,000,000, which is a fine exceeding KRW 50,000,000, which was sentenced in the trial, despite the application of the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration pursuant to Articles 368 and 396 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (20,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act of ex officio judgment provides that a person who does not pay a fine shall be confined in a workhouse and work for a period of not less than one day but not more than three years.

“.......”

In this regard, while sentencing a fine of KRW 60,00 to the defendant, the court below set the daily conversion amount of KRW 100,000 to KRW 10,000,000, and committed an illegal act during the period of conversion.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below must be reversed.

Despite these reasons for reversal of authority, the reasons for appeal on the grounds of violation of law by the defendant is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. According to the record as to the assertion of violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, this Court recognized the fact that the Defendant rendered a fine of 60,000 won on October 2, 2019, when deliberating on the criminal facts of this case against the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion on a different premise is without merit without examining any further.

4. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Grounds for another judgment】 The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence, and the gist of evidence are identical to the facts stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of

Application of Statutes

1. The relevant Article of the Act and the traffic law of choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;