2. The injury suffered by the victim is not heavy, and the traffic accident in this case was a minor accident in light of shock or the degree of damage by a motor vehicle, etc. at the time of the accident;

It is recognized that there are favorable circumstances, such as: (a) the Defendant: (b) neglected to surrender the victim involved in an accident; (c) reported 119; (d) took a minimum measure to ensure the safety of the victim; (d) the victim does not want the punishment of the victim in agreement with the victim; (e) the victim is both starting the instant crime; and (e) the Defendant could have been tried at the same time as before the judgment of the court below.

However, the Defendant, while driving without a driver’s license, has invaded the central line and caused a traffic accident, and the degree of violation of his duty of care cannot be deemed to be disadvantageous to the Defendant’s liability.

In addition, even after the occurrence of a traffic accident, the nature of the crime is also bad, such as not informing the victim of the personal information and escape.

The defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had been punished several times due to a non-licensed driving crime.

According to these circumstances, it is reasonable to punish the defendant.

Comprehensively taking account of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that make the sentence different from the original judgment, such as the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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.