The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (amounting to five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. According to each evidence recorded in the preceding and preceding records in the summary of the following evidence before and after the judgment of the court below was rendered, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and a fine of one million won on September 7, 2017 for six months, due to the crime of injury in the Cheongju District Court’s Assistance, after the judgment of the court below of this case was rendered, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on August 30, 2017.

However, the crime of injury and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, constitute concurrent crimes by the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and when determining the punishment of this case pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence should be imposed in consideration of equity with the case where the sentence of this case was adjudicated simultaneously with the final and conclusive injury crime, etc.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. 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, since there is a ground for reversal ex officio as above, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence were sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year and a fine not exceeding one million won in June of 2017, and the above judgment was finalized on September 7, 2017.

“A previous conviction in the judgment of the court below” is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding “a prior conviction in the judgment of the court in 1.0” to “a defendant’s oral statement at the court below and the content of the case (hereinafter 2017 senior assistance 108),” and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 444 (2) of the Road Traffic Act (opportune selection) concerning facts constituting an offense.