The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles 1) Korean vehicle company, the victim of the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “victim Korean vehicle company”).

(2) Since the lower court expressed the Defendant’s intention not to be punished at an investigative agency, the lower court neglected this part of the prosecution under Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and was in a state of mental disability.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the assertion of non-prosecution of punishment against the victim Korean body of vehicles in Korea (hereinafter “Korea body of vehicles”) in order to recognize that the victim expressed his/her wish not to punish or withdrawn his/her previous wish to punish the victim, the victim’s actual intent should be expressed in a way that it is apparent and reliable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do1809, Jun. 15, 2001). The following circumstances acknowledged by the record: (i) the victim’s Korean body did not submit to the investigative agency or the court of original judgment: (ii) the police officer did not submit to the investigative agency or the lower court a written statement expressing his/her wish not to punish the defendant; (iii) the phrase “the attachment of a written estimate on the external wall of “Korean body” damaged by the suspect” as written under title “the investigation report” is insignificant and thus, the Korean body of vehicles in Korea did not submit a written estimate without requiring compensation.

In full view of the fact that "the name or position of the person who made a statement that he does not want such compensation" is written, the victim Korean body does not wish to punish the defendant.