The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (7 million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, since the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and the crime of violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act in the judgment of the court below are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment within the scope of the term of punishment, which is limited to concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, shall be determined. However, the court below found the defendant guilty of all of the above crimes, thereby making a mistake of omitting the heavy amount of concurrent crimes. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are all the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (2) 1, Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, subparagraph 2 of Article 154 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 46 (2) and Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In light of the reasoning for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is necessary to punish the Defendant on a strict basis in light of the fact that he/she drives an ex officio under the influence of alcohol level of 0.282% during the period of suspension of execution.

However, the defendant is not a party.