[1] The number of crimes under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (=ordinary concurrence)

[2] The case holding that the judgment of the court below which held that the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death and Injury caused by Dangerous Driving) and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence is a substantive concurrent relation, and thus, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and the crime of violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence, are a substantive concurrent relation

[1] In a case where a person is injured by driving a motor vehicle while normal driving is difficult due to influence of alcohol or drugs, and at the same time another person's property is damaged, the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence in addition to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death and Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving) is established, and the above two crimes are crimes due to

[2] The case holding that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the relation of the number of crimes in the judgment below, which held that the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act and the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence are concurrent relations between the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) among each crime, and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence among the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. of Specific Crimes, and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property is a substantive concurrent relation.

[1] Article 40 of the Criminal Act, Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act / [2] Articles 37 and 40 of the Criminal Act, Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 148-2 and 151 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 152 subparagraph 1 of

[2] Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7143 decided Nov. 13, 2008 (Gong2008Ha, 1723) Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9182 decided Dec. 11, 2008 (Gong2009Sang, 74)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Sung-sung et al.

Daegu District Court Decision 2009No2471 Decided September 22, 2009

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. In a case where a person is injured by driving a motor vehicle while normal driving is difficult due to influence of alcohol or drugs, and at the same time another person's property is damaged, the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the occupational injury and damage of property is established in addition to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death and Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving). The above two crimes are the crimes of violation

2. The summary of the facts charged of this case is as follows: while the defendant drives (vehicle number omitted) a strawing vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.201% without a driver's license while driving the strawing vehicle under the influence of normal operation due to the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.201%, the defendant suffered injury by the victim and damaged each of the above strawing vehicles at the same time by getting the above strawing vehicle under the influence of the above strawing vehicle under the influence of signal signal at the front. The court below found the defendant guilty of the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Dangerous Driving), the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Dangerous Driving) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence, according to the above legal principles, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Dangerous Driving Death) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence.

Unlike this, the court below held that the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) are in a mutually competitive relationship only between the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence are in a substantive concurrent relationship, and sentenced to one punishment within the scope of the punishment calculated by adding the sum of the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property by occupational negligence and the long-term punishment of violation of the Road Traffic Act by occupational negligence and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

3. Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)