The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “the crime of causing bodily injury to a dangerous driving”) and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “the crime of causing bodily injury to a dangerous driving”) are deemed to be a substantive concurrent relationship. However, in the case where the crime of causing bodily injury to a dangerous driving is established, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the grounds of the crime

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, etc.) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of other charges, but found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that the charge of causing bodily injury resulting from dangerous driving was included in the crime of causing bodily injury resulting from escape for the following reasons.

(2) In a case where the crime of bodily injury resulting from escape is established, the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Traffic Accident Handling is not established separately

However, the crime of causing bodily injury caused by drinking is stipulated in Article 268 of the Criminal Act as the special case of causing bodily injury by occupational negligence, except for driving in the state of drinking, and the crime of causing bodily injury by occupational negligence under Article 268 of the Criminal Act is merely a special case of causing bodily injury by occupational negligence.

Therefore, in a case where the crime of bodily injury resulting from escape is established, the crime of bodily injury resulting from drinking is not included in the crime of bodily injury resulting from escape as well as the crime of bodily injury resulting from escape.

B. (1) Legal concurrence means that a single act appears to meet the constituent elements of several crimes in appearance, but actually constitutes only one crime. In fact, whether a single crime or several crimes are actually one crime shall be determined by considering the constituent elements of the crime and the legal interests and interests to be protected.

Supreme Court Decision 2001Do1429 Delivered on January 15, 2004