The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal: misunderstanding of legal principles, mental disorder and unreasonable sentencing

A. The reason why the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is punished is because the driver is likely to cause secondary damage on the road when he/she was assaulted during his/her operation.

However, in this case, the victim did not have any possibility to continue to operate a motor vehicle, considering that the victim was assaulted against the driver of the motor vehicle who is a "stop while in operation," not " while in operation."

Therefore, the defendant cannot be viewed as a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

B. The Defendant was in the state of impurrative personnel in a state of drinking alcohol in excess of 3 to 5 in a state of influoral personnel in a state of mental disorder (e.g., mental disorder or mental disorder). At the time of committing the instant crime, at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in the state of having

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the assertion of the above legal principles is that the crime of assault or assault against the driver of a motor vehicle in operation constitutes one of the legal interests protected by the law, by severely punishing the driver, passengers, or pedestrians by force, etc. against the driver of the motor vehicle in operation, thereby establishing traffic order and promoting the safety of citizens. Thus, in a case where the infringement of the legal interests protected by the law is not anticipated, such as assault against the driver who stops the motor vehicle without the intention of continuous operation at a place where there is no risk of undermining public safety and order, the establishment of the above crime cannot be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4375, Dec. 11, 2008).