2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and sold vehicles used for the instant crime; (b) the victim’s injury is relatively minor; and (c) the victim does not want the punishment by agreement with the victim.

Meanwhile, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, who is a dump truck driver, due to negligence on the part of the Defendant, neglecting the duty of dump driver at the intersection where signal, etc. is not installed, resulting in an injury to the victim, and thus, the degree of negligence is not less severe, and the crime of this case was punished several times as a traffic-related crime even before the crime of this case was committed. In particular, even during the suspension of execution due to the crime of driving without a license, etc.

In light of the above circumstances and the overall sentencing conditions of Article 51 of the Criminal Act as indicated in the records and arguments in the instant case, since there is no change in the additional sentencing conditions in the trial, it is difficult to view the lower court’s sentence as being too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion 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.