2. It is recognized that the defendant has no record of the same kind of crime due to driving of a motor vehicle except for the previous conviction punished by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (non-licensed driving) once, and that the defendant recognized the crime and is in profoundly against the defendant.

However, the instant crime takes place by lending an accident vehicle that was not covered by mandatory insurance.

In light of the degree of injury and the scale of accident, it is not easy to say that the sentence of the court below is unreasonable, considering all the circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing specified in the records, such as Defendant’s age, environment, occupation, family relation, etc., the sentence of the court below is unreasonable, considering the following circumstances: (a) the damaged vehicle which was parked in the motor vehicle due to his/her neglect of duty at the time of the front stop was inflicted on the victims (the victim C is the victim’s 2 c., e., e., e., e., the c., e., the c., e., the c., e., the c., the c., the c., the c. e. the c.

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