2. The lower court determined the sentence by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant agreed with the bereaved family members of the victim of the crime of occupational injury or death and the victim of the special injury; (b) the Defendant did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime; and (c) the Defendant’s liability for each of the crimes of this case was not somewhat unfavorable; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive for the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and other various sentencing conditions

Even when considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope, sufficiently taking into account all the circumstances regarding sentencing.

In particular, the Defendant asserts that the implementation of the community service order may hinder the livelihood of the Defendant on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing. However, the lower court appears to have sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence on the premise that the community service order will be implemented, taking into account various sentencing conditions, and it is difficult to recognize that there are special circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court solely on

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because the defendant's appeal is without merit.