A. In light of the circumstances before and after the instant traffic accident, the Defendant did not intentionally cause a traffic accident, such as the facts charged, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions of this case, the sentence that the court below sentenced against the defendant (6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant intentionally caused a traffic accident like the facts charged, thereby causing injury to the victim, and damaged the victim’s vehicle, and that the intent was recognized.

In light of the above evidence, a thorough examination of the circumstances presented by the court below in light of the above evidence is just in rejecting the defendant's assertion based on such circumstances and finding the defendant guilty of this part of the charges, and there are errors as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Ultimately, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. In full view of the grounds for sentencing indicated in the instant arguments and records, the lower court’s sentencing on the Defendant appears to have been appropriately determined by fully taking account of all the circumstances, including the various grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant, and there are no special circumstances to change the above punishment.

Ultimately, we do not accept the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.