2. The lower court determined the Defendant’s punishment by taking account of the following circumstances confirmed through the entire records and the purport of the pleading.

The favorable normal circumstances: ① the defendant is led to confession and reflect, ② the circumstances unfavorable to the injury suffered by the victim: ① the central line of the central line that did not take necessary measures to avoid traffic accidents; ② the defendant was unable to take any measure to avoid a traffic accident; ③ the fact that there was no comprehensive insurance for the victim; ③ the fact that there was a history of punishment for traffic-related crimes, such as drinking and non-licenseless license; ③ even if the court below determined that the above circumstances were sufficiently different from the above circumstances, the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of discretion, even if it is determined that the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of discretion.

It does not seem unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is.

Therefore, the defendant's double punishment cannot be accepted.

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.