The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the victim F.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) shall be excessively unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

Of the facts charged in this case, the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of property caused by occupational negligence is a crime falling under Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, and such crime cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases

According to the records, among the victims, D expressed that on March 10, 2014, the victims would not be punished for the defendant on March 10, 2014 by mutual consent with the defendant, and that on March 10, 2014, the above agreement was submitted to the court below on March 12, 2014. Thus, it is reasonable to view that the victims expressed their intention not to be punished for the defendant before the court below sentenced the defendant. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of non-prosecution in the indictment by finding guilty of the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the damage of occupational property among the facts charged in the instant case pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above ex officio reversal.

【The reason for the judgment of the court which held that the facts constituting the crime and the summary of the evidence recognized by this court are as follows. The summary of the facts constituting the crime of the court below and the summary of the evidence are as follows: "At the same time, the above patrol car was damaged to the extent that the repair cost, such as the exchange of the preceding gate, was 746,336 won, and the repair cost, such as the exchange of the preceding gate, was damaged to the extent that the above 1,301,586 won was damaged."