The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, where the defendant denied the crime of this case and did not object to the denial, and thus, the court below’s decision of deferment of sentence was made by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the suspended sentence of KRW 100,000,000) is too unjustifiable and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of this case to the following facts charged at the time of the trial. Since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more in this respect.

However, the prosecutor's argument that there is a ground for reversal of authority as above is still subject to the judgment of the court, so it will be examined.

3. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, the phrase "where the circumstances before the opening is obvious" among the requirements for a suspended sentence as to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles refers to a case where even if the punishment is not imposed in light of the comprehensively taking into account the conditions of sentencing as stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the degree of reflectivity, the circumstance that the defendant would not be subject to the punishment again, is limited to the case where the "where the circumstances before the opening is obvious" means the case where the defendant repents with the depth of the crime, or it is not interpreted that the suspension of sentence may not be always made in case where the defendant denies the criminal facts without confession.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2001Do6138, Feb. 20, 2003). In light of the above legal principles, the instant case is health care unit, although the Defendant denies the instant crime, the Defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same type of crime, and the Defendant was a bus due to a sudden stop.