2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it in the appellate

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the court below’s decision on July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of all the circumstances and records of the instant pleadings and records, including the following: (a) health class; (b) the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s mistake in the trial; (c) the Defendant agreed with the victim; (d) the degree of injury to the victim was minor; and (e) the Defendant was a first offender with no criminal force; and (e) there are favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s escape without taking necessary measures against traffic accident; and (e) there are unfavorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime; and (e) the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is unreasonable because it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion

Therefore, the defendant's 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.