2. The judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of discretion in sentencing determination, unlike various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case, the fact that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victim is favorable to the defendant, or that the degree of injury of the victim is not less severe, and that the defendant has been punished several times of traffic-related crimes.

In full view of the circumstances to be assessed or the fact that there is no new data that was presented in the course of the trial of sentencing at the party, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.), since the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is unlimited and it does not seem unfair, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.