The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The defendant was assaulted by the victim, and did not assault the victim, or did not damage the warning.

The sentencing of the lower court (hereinafter referred to as a fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

Article 457-2 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "where a defendant declares a more severe punishment than that of a summary order with respect to a case for which a request for formal trial has been made, the reasons for sentencing shall be stated in the written judgment."

However, according to the records, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million with approximately KRW 200,000 by this court on January 25, 2019. On January 28, 2019, the Defendant requested formal trial with respect to the above summary order on January 28, 2019. Accordingly, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 3 million on July 9, 2020, and recognized the fact that the reasons for sentencing are not stated in the said summary order.

The court below sentenced a more severe punishment than that of a summary order on a case for which the defendant requested formal trial, but omitted the reasons for sentencing in the written judgment, thereby violating Article 457-2 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and will be examined below.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, i.e. CCTV images in which the crime form of this case was taken and the witness testimony, etc., the defendant assaulted the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below, destroyed the sloping bridge, and there is no illegality of mistake of

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

In conclusion, the court below did not decide on the allegation of unfair sentencing on the ground of ex officio reversal.