2. The crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the defendant due to the negligence of the defendant who gets left at the center of the center and thereby causing injury to the victim, such as the victim's failure to move back due to the kidy damage in need of 12 weeks medical treatment and the damage to the number of water, etc., and the nature of the crime is not easy. The defendant is recognized to have submitted the written agreement to the court below, but the court below seems to have ordered the defendant to attend a compliance instruction and provide community service while suspending the execution of imprisonment, considering such circumstances, the court below seems to have ordered the defendant to attend a compliance instruction and provide community service. In addition, considering all of the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means, and consequence, before and after the crime, the defendant's punishment against the defendant is too too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, as stated in the “Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents,” among the application of the law of the court below, since it is apparent that the “Article 3(2) proviso No. 2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents,” is omitted, and it