The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in light of the overall sentencing conditions in light of the gist of the grounds for appeal.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration is to guarantee the defendant's right to appeal or a right to request a formal trial against a summary order. In the case of a higher court or a formal trial which only the defendant appealeds for the defendant or for the defendant, the court shall not sentence more severe punishment than punishment already sentenced or notified for the same criminal facts. The determination of whether a sentence disadvantageous to the defendant should be based on the seriousness of the criminal punishment under the Criminal Act. In addition, where the defendant's appeal or formal trial is applied for concurrent crimes after a case different from the one for which the defendant filed an appeal or a request for a formal trial is joined and examined, the determination of whether the sentence is disadvantageous to the defendant should be made by considering the whole order such as concurrent punishment or additional punishment, suspension of execution, total number of days pending trial days, period of detention in the workhouse, etc. In addition, where the defendant's appeal or formal trial is applied for concurrent crimes after examination, it should not simply compare the punishment sentenced or notified for the case, but it should be determined whether the combined sentence constitutes a disadvantageous alteration of the sentence which has been adjudicated by considering the objective circumstances of the defendant's status, such as a concurrent punishment and sentence.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6784 Decided November 11, 2004) In light of the records, the Defendant filed a claim for a formal trial (the Jeonju District Court Decision 2013No117 Decided July 9, 2013) upon receipt of a summary order of a fine of two million won for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (not taking measures after accidents) and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (not taking measures after accidents) on September 5, 2012, and the lower court filed a claim for a formal trial (the Jeonju District Court Decision 2013No17 Decided July 9, 2013).