Each judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

On the second judgment of the court below, the defendant, at the time of the crime in the second judgment of the court below, caused the defendant to be less than three times a motor vehicle owned by the victim D at the time of the crime, and the court below did not have any damage to the above motor vehicle.

When the second judgment on the appeal against mental or physical disability, it is difficult for the defendant to satise the satisfic satchological disorder at the time of the crime and the man-made disease who has symptoms of existing mental disorder, such as overcoming, overcoming, and decreasing the desire, and there was an aggressive tendency, so it was in a state that the defendant lacks ability to discern things or make decisions.

The punishment of each court below (two years and six months of imprisonment with prison labor of the first instance court, and two months of imprisonment with prison labor of the second instance court) against the judgment of the first and second instance court is too unreasonable.

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the judgment of the court below that the defendant filed an appeal was consolidated and tried in the trial, and the facts of the above crimes against the defendant are all concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence should be imposed. Thus, each judgment of the court below against the defendant cannot be maintained any more.

Nevertheless, the defendant's argument of misunderstanding of facts against the second judgment of the court of appeal is still subject to the judgment of the court of this court, so it will change his claim to be examined.

On August 16, 2013, the summary of this part of the facts charged by the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts was that the victim D(1971) came into contact with the E vehicle while the defendant was driving a C-car at the entrance of the Seoul Northern-dong Seoul Northern-dong, Seoul Metropolitan Government on the road.

Accordingly, the Defendant, while taking a bath such as “this son....”, brought the victim a down from the vehicle, but the victim locked the door, reported that he was seated in the vehicle, and saw the victim as a drinking, she saw it on the side of the driver’s seat on the vehicle.

This is the defendant.