2. We examine both parties’ assertion of unfair sentencing.

The circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake is divided, that the defendant's health has significantly deteriorated due to old age, narrowness, serious landscape color, etc., that the wife of the defendant is treating as dementia diseases, and that the bus of the defendant's driver is joining the bus mutual aid association.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the victim D (hereinafter referred to as the "victim") crossinging the crosswalk without any rescue measures despite being taken by the defendant as the bus of the defendant driving. The crime of this case resulted in the death of the victim and the result of damage is very heavy. Since the crosswalk, which is the accident location, was installed at the crosswalk of this case, and was in a state of visioning the crosswalk, it would have been possible to prevent the occurrence of the accident of this case if the defendant had taken the front door. The defendant did not surrenders even after the investigation was commenced after the accident of this case, even after the accident of this case, but the defendant was identified as the suspect after the long-term investigation was conducted by the investigative agency, but the fact of the accident was denied, and the fact that the defendant was found to have driven the bus after the accident of this case, and the fact that the defendant was found to have not agreed with the victim's bereaved family members and the bereaved family members did not have any agreement with the victim.

The circumstances mentioned above, the age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant, and other arguments in this case.