교통사고처리특례법위반
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. In light of all the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant's error (e.g., punishment in form) recognized and depthed, and that the victims agreed to do so, the punishment (e.g., six months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of order to attend a course) sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.
2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant shows the appearance of the defendant, the vehicle of the defendant is covered by a comprehensive insurance, and the victim is not punished by the defendant by mutual consent with the victims at the original trial.
However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant while driving the BNAS car, and the victim C (the age of 35) who was crossinged the crosswalk, and the victim C (the age of 35) was shocked for about 12 weeks to the victim C, and the victim D was faced with a string of the wall that requires approximately 2 weeks of treatment. As such, the defendant's shocking of the victim who crossing the crosswalk is serious to the degree of negligence as it violates the basic traffic order, which is the duty of pedestrian protection, and the degree of negligence is serious to the degree of injury suffered by the victim C, and the nature of the crime is not good. In full view of all other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, health status, character and behavior, environment, circumstance of this case, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is judged to be proper and it is not recognized to be too unfair. Thus, the above defendant's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.