Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (as to the defendant's injury caused by occupational negligence), the victim's lusence was only caused by lusism, but not caused by the instant traffic accident.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The Defendant asserts that, with respect to the sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 18 million) by the lower court, the Defendant is too unlimited, and the prosecutor argues that it is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant asserted to the same effect as the lower court rendered in the trial.

As to this, the lower court did not accept the Defendant’s above assertion and found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged in full view of the facts revealed through the evidence duly admitted and examined.

Examining the above judgment of the court below after closely comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and the judgment below did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged above by the defendant.

B. In full view of the grounds for sentencing stated in the instant argument and the record as to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully considering the various grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, and there is no special circumstance to ex post facto change the sentencing.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.