Defendant B’s appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 and Defendant A’s appeal against the judgment of the court below No. 2.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. Defendant B (unfair sentencing)’s each sentence imposed on the Defendant (the first instance judgment: imprisonment of one year, two years of probation, protection observation, community service, 200 hours, 40 hours of lecture attendance order, and 2 million won of fine) is too heavy.

B. Defendant A (misunderstanding the facts against the judgment of the court below of the second instance) did not commit any act of harm as described in this part of the facts charged, and only committed a passive resistance to escape from an unjust attack against B.

(c)

The first instance judgment of the prosecutor (unfair sentencing against the judgment of the court of first instance) is too weak for the defendant B to be sentenced.

2. Judgment as to Defendant B

A. As to the Defendant’s reversal of ex officio following the consolidation, the first instance court sentenced the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, and the second lower court sentenced the fine, respectively.

This case is not a case where a single sentence is punished for each crime in the judgment of the first and second won judgment against the defendant, and it is not reversed ex officio on the ground of consolidation.

B. The Defendant made a judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing was a party to the trial, and all of the facts constituting the instant crime have been led to confession, and the said victims do not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual consent with L/N of the traffic accident victims.

The defendant has no past record of criminal punishment except for punishment as a fine once.

However, the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle, does not take any measure while driving the motor vehicle, and runs away without taking any measure, and the liability for the crime is not easy.

(2) A victim of a traffic accident who was unable to reach agreement with the victim B on the crime of O, P, or injury.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following factors: the Defendant’s age character and character environment, motive and means of crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing judgment by each court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

It is deemed that it is unfair to maintain it as it is.