2. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s judgment was in line with the depth of the commission of the crime, and the Defendant was under the influence of his parent’s care due to her failure to receive the care from her parents, etc., and the circumstances, etc. suggesting that the Defendant is currently supporting the elderly’s money who is growing the Defendant.

However, in the case of cargo vehicles, it is expected that the traffic accident will occur, so it is required to pay more attention to drivers.

Nevertheless, the defendant, while driving a tank lock vehicle on an expressway, suffered a serious injury to the driver of the damaged vehicle that has driven the central line due to the gross negligence, and caused the driver of the damaged vehicle to suffer a serious injury in need of six-day medical treatment, and the Da's wife F (49 years of age) and ASEAN (31 years of age) who was on board the damaged vehicle to die in cerebrovascular, are very serious.

The crime of violation of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act also has been committed by the defendant, even though he was punished several times due to the same crime, and the nature of the crime is heavy.

Although it is recognized that the victim D was suffering from severe mental distress due to the traffic accident caused by the Defendant, which caused the Defendant, the victim was unable to reach an agreement up to the trial, and the victim D wanted to suffer severe punishment against the Defendant.

In addition, considering the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant and all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings, the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.