The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, did not normally operate the Defendant’s vehicle and did not intend to cause damage to the Defendant’s vehicle.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s determination is based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated as follows. In other words, the victim intentionally led the Defendant to his/her own vehicle at the investigative agency.

A statement, ② The Defendant’s vehicle and the victim’s vehicle conflict with each other. According to the photograph taken immediately after the accident, the victim appears to have maintained the direction of the direction of the Defendant’s vehicle to avoid the vehicle. On the other hand, the Defendant’s vehicle appears to have opened the vehicle to the right side, i.e., the direction of the victim’s driving, rather than the right side of the ongoing direction. ③ According to CCTV images at the time of the accident, it appears to be due to the Defendant’s vehicle’s finding of the victim’s vehicle. This appears to be due to the fact that the Defendant’s vehicle was found to have driven the vehicle to the left side, not to the right side of the proceeding as above, even though the Defendant discovered the victim who was going through several times of the accident, and ④ the Defendant’s vehicle entered into the village as E on the day, and returned to the village without having opened the Defendant’s farm at around 18:15 on the day, and 18:15 on the day, the Defendant left the vehicle to the village by leaving 15:3 of the village.