All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (in fact-finding and inappropriate sentencing) was driving by the Defendant, while driving his phone, and the injury in this case occurred, and the Defendant was driving the instant accident while the Defendant was unable to drive normally.

In addition, the punishment (limited to four years of imprisonment, confiscation) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment) sentenced by the lower court (4 years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts.

The court below rejected the above argument in detail, and in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is legitimate, and the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is difficult to accept.

B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor is based on statutory penalty, and a discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, on the basis of statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

Supreme Court Decision 200