The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The Defendant asserts that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as the grounds for appeal of this case are too unreasonable.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case and the fact that vehicles operated by the defendant are covered by a comprehensive insurance, and that they are in depth divided, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the following is ruled again

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the criminal facts of the defendant recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they shall be quoted by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Application of Statutes

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (this regular consideration in determining the grounds for appeal);