The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. The main point of the grounds of appeal is that the victim's injury suffered by the victim was caused by the her married escape, and there is no relation between the assault inflicted by the defendant and the injury inflicted by the victim (misunderstanding of legal principles). The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair (an unfair sentencing).2.

A. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the assertion of misunderstanding 1) If the victim died on the vehicle while the victim tried to escape from the Defendant’s assault, such act of injury and the death of the victim have a substantial relation with the victim’s sexual intercourse (see Supreme Court Decision 96Do529, May 10, 196, etc.). If the act of intending to engage in sexual intercourse with the victim’s assault or intimidation, or the act of intending to escape from the fear and to escape from the fear, there is a relation with the so-called considerable causal relationship between the Defendant’s act and the result of the idea.

It should be seen (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do425 delivered on May 12, 1995, etc.). 2) The Defendant asserted to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part. The lower court acknowledged the causal relationship between the Defendant’s act and the injury suffered by the victim by taking into account the degree of assault inflicted by the Defendant on the victim, the state of the victim at the time, and the escape situation of the victim

3) Examining the records of this case closely in light of the aforementioned legal principles, a thorough examination of the records of this case by the Defendant, there is a substantial relation between the injury and the assault by the Defendant who suffered from the stairs that the Defendant was frightly frighted to drive away by himself due to concerns that a person who was frightened by the Defendant would drive away his own.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

B. The Defendant generally recognized the factual basis of the instant crime as to the wrongful argument of sentencing.

The severe injury suffered by the victim is wholly caused by the defendant's act.