Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The Defendant was not negligent in violating the speed limit at the time of driving of the instant case.

Furthermore, there was negligence.

Even if the traffic accident of this case complies with the speed limit, there is no substantial relation between such negligence and the result.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (six months’ imprisonment without prison labor) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendant's defense counsel presented the same argument as the grounds for appeal of mistake of the above facts at the court below, and the court below rejected the above argument in accordance with the detailed reasoning under the title "the grounds for conviction" in the judgment of the court below. When comparing the above judgment of the court below with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is an error of law due to mistake of facts, contrary to the defendant's assertion.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. In light of the fact that the instant traffic accident caused the victim’s death due to the determination of the illegality of sentencing, strict punishment is required.

However, when the defendant was the first offender, the defendant deposited a certain amount for the victim's side, and the degree of negligence of the defendant is significant.

In full view of the following: (a) it is difficult to conclude that the victim’s unauthorized crossing at night was the cause of the occurrence of the instant traffic accident or the expansion of damage; and (b) comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (c) various sentencing conditions stated in the instant argument, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and unfair. Accordingly, this part of

3.