The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

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

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with labor for not less than 10 months) by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The instant crime is deemed to have caused a traffic accident that causes a serious injury to two victims by driving the Defendant under the influence of alcohol while driving the Defendant under the influence of alcohol and causing a violation of signal, and the degree of illegality is very serious and the result therefrom is very serious, so a strict punishment against the Defendant is required.

However, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and divided his mistake, that the court below agreed with the victim C in the original trial, and that the victim E in the first instance reached an agreement with the victim, and that the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, and that the defendant is the first offender who has no criminal record.

Examining the aforementioned circumstances and other conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, health conditions, circumstances after the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is deemed to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal by the defendant is again ruled as follows.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369

Application of Statutes

1. Article 3(1), the proviso to Article 3(2)1, Article 3(1), Article 3(2)1, Article 3, and Article 8 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 148-2(2)2, and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018) concerning criminal facts;

1.Article 40 of the Criminal Code of Trade and Trade.