The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and a fine of one hundred thousand won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. The court below's scope of trial in this case sentenced a conviction on the remaining facts charged except for the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property resulting from occupational negligence (2020 order 2093 order order 2093) among the facts charged in this case. The court below's decision to dismiss the prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but as long as the court found the defendant guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the injury resulting from dangerous driving) in relation to the commercial concurrence, the court below's decision to dismiss the prosecution in separate order

The decision was determined.

In regard to this, only the Defendant filed an appeal against the conviction part of the judgment below, and the prosecutor did not file an appeal. Thus, the dismissal part of the above public prosecution, which is in a mutually competitive relationship with the above guilty part, was transferred to the trial together with the conviction part in accordance with the principle of indivisible appeal, but the part was already exempted from the object of attack and defense between the parties and was virtually relieved from the object of trial.

Therefore, the scope of the trial for the trial is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below, and the dismissal part of the indictment is subject to the conclusion of the judgment of the court below, and it is not judged separately in the trial

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (one year of imprisonment and a fine of two hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

3. The judgment of the defendant violated the stop signal, caused a traffic accident, thereby causing the injury to the victim, and escaped as it is. While being tried in the above case, he/she did not subscribe to another liability insurance and was driving under the influence of alcohol without a license, resulting in an injury to the victims. In light of the circumstances of the accident, the degree of alcohol concentration during blood transfusion, etc., the criminal liability is heavy.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized in full and is against depth while living in a prison for eight months, and the victim C, F, and I agree with it.