The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in the case of this case where he was found guilty of the victim's breath after he stopped the taxi, and even though he was not guilty of the victim's breath in the taxi, there was an error of mistake of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the above assertion by misunderstanding of facts on the same purport in detail. The court below rejected the above assertion by misunderstanding of facts.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the victim consistently stated that he/she would have her right ear and her buck part between his/her own neck. Even if he/she was expected to sit as the defendant, as alleged by the defendant, the victim would have been able to see the above part of the damage if he/she had displayed his/her arms with his/her body in the driver's seat after taking a detailed attitude, such as her bucking, or even her bucking, even if he/she had her body in the driver's seat, as alleged by the defendant. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. The crime of this case was committed on the basis of unreasonable sentencing. Although the case was not less than that of assaulting the victim who was driving a taxi, considering the following factors: (a) the defendant expressed his intention not to punish the defendant; (b) it is difficult to see that the victim expressed his intention not to punish the defendant; and (c) the defendant has no criminal power to punish the defendant in excess of the same kind of punishment or fine; and (d) the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, the court below’s punishment seems to be somewhat unreasonable.