A. Defendant (1) chips submitted by the prosecutor of the misapprehension of legal principles are not stored prior to the instant accident and after the video recording file. As such, it cannot be ruled out that these photographs cannot be admissible as evidence because they cannot be artificially opened, the court below erred by misapprehending the rules of evidence by taking the aforementioned CD and photograph as evidence of guilt.

(2) There was no intention for the defendant to have injured the victim or damaged the vehicle.

(3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence is too unfilled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the image is stored in one minute file on the black chips submitted by the prosecutor. While the instant accident is not stored in two minutes prior to the recorded file and three minutes after the file, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s act was artificially opened, such as copying of the black chips or the black chips, which were produced by the lower court as evidence, and copying of the black chips (the instant accident stored in the black chips) or copying photographs (the printing of the instant accident stored in the black chips or CDs from the recorded file).

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, the victim changed the lane two times, and the defendant changed the lane immediately before and after the change of the lane, and the victim changed the lane again, the defendant changed the lane above immediately before and after the change of the lane, and the direction of the victim's vehicle to avoid collision is turned back to the left and right.