The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000 (one million).

Defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal: misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing

2. Determination

A. "Assault" as referred to in the crime of assault under Article 260 of the Criminal Act means the exercise of tangible force against a human body, and the exercise of tangible force means physical and mental suffering.

On the other hand, the act of placing or throwing a hand or an article, as the body of the victim is close to that of the victim, did not directly contact the victim's body.

Even if it is an illegal use of force against the victim, it can be said that it constitutes violence.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do4126, Jul. 24, 2008; 2016Do9302, Oct. 27, 2016). Such legal doctrine is the same in cases of “Assault against a driver” in this case.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it is recognized that the defendant committed the same act as the stated in the facts charged of this case, and this constitutes "Assault" regulated by the "Drivers Violence."

The defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is not accepted.

B. Following the point of unfair sentencing, this paper examines the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing.

The “crime of assault against a driver” as in the instant case is an act of threatening the safety of drivers, passengers, or pedestrians by force, etc. against a driver of a motor vehicle in operation (including a case where the driver temporarily stops for getting on or off passengers) and thus, it is unnecessary to strictly punish the driver, passengers, or pedestrians. Therefore, this Court does not deny the judgment of the court below.

However, in light of various circumstances, such as the developments leading up to the instant crime, the form of the act, and the attitude of the victim as seen below revealed in the argument and the record of the instant case, the lower court, which applied the aforementioned general standard to the Defendant uniformly, thereby making the Defendant a ground for an unfavorable sentencing.