The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for ten months.

1. In light of the moving route of vehicles recorded in CCTV images and the process of facing victims, etc., the defendant intentionally left a vehicle to the victims.

may be appointed by a person.

However, the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case.

2. The ex officio determination prosecutor shall maintain the special injury among the facts charged in this case as the main facts charged, but the court applied for the modification of indictment to add the facts of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents as the ancillary facts charged, and the judgment of the court below shall not be maintained as it is, since

However, there is a ground for reversal of authority above, but the prosecutor's assertion of mistake as to the primary facts charged is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. Judgment on the primary facts charged 1) The summary of the primary facts charged is that the defendant is a person who resides in the unit B apartment unit in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and the victim D (the 54 years old) is a person who resides in the above apartment unit E, a house directly adjacent to the defendant's residence.

In 207, the Defendant, at the time of performing the duties by being in charge of the Dong-dong representative, was punished for the disputes with each other with an execution clause system for apartment construction costs, and was immediately next to the Defendant, but there was no high difference between the Defendant and the victim for about 10 years.

On July 3, 2017, at the first floor parking lot of the above apartment on July 3, 2017, the Defendant landed to the victim D with the phone called “F-wing vehicles owned by the Defendant are moving to another place because they are moving to a different place because they are moving to another place because they are standing off the vehicles owned by the victim D.”

After that, why the defendant could be deducted from the victim D's "which can be sufficiently deducted from the difference, is why you would deduct the difference.

The defective victim D refers to "the direct difference of the vehicle which reduces the height of the vehicle", and the victim D is the victim D with the above vehicle.