The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below acquitted the victim K of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against the victim D, and acquitted the victim of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against the victim D, among the facts charged in the instant case, of the violation of the Road Traffic Act on the passenger car, the K7 passenger car, and QM3 car (not later than the accident).

However, since only the Defendant appealed the part of the judgment of the court below on the grounds of misunderstanding of the facts, misunderstanding of the legal principles, and misunderstanding of the sentencing, and the prosecutor did not appeal the part of the acquittal and the part of the reasoning, the part of the judgment of the court below was separated and finalized as it is, and the part of the judgment of the court below was remanded to the trial. However, this part of the judgment of the court below was already exempted from the object of attack and defense between the parties and was de facto separated from the object of the trial, and thus, it cannot be determined as to that part (see Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004; 2009Do12934, Jan. 14, 2010). Accordingly, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below on the part of the acquittal and the part of the reasons is not separately determined.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (guilty part) The Defendant was only dysnizing dys by dividing the R and bee 2 disease, which is a death-related relationship.

In addition, 19:00 to 19:10, the defendant's final drinking time, and the accident of this case occurred at around 19:18, and the defendant's blood alcohol concentration at the time of the accident of this case exceeded 0.05%, which is the punishment standard value.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) Since the victim M is the age of 71 years old and can be proved by a king disease, the victim was injured by the instant accident.

It shall not be readily concluded.

3) Nevertheless, we find the Defendant guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against M and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against M.