2. The following circumstances are acknowledged: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects his mistake; (b) the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle is covered by a comprehensive insurance policy; and (c) the health of the Defendant is not good due to depression and yellow dust; and (d) economic circumstances are not excessive.

However, the crime of this case was committed without taking any measures to cause damage to a cost of repairing 25 million won by shocking the fences for preventing unauthorized crossings installed on the road. The case is not somewhat weak. In light of the Defendant’s attitude after committing the crime that the police officer called to the scene of the accident demanded the Defendant to set the scene of the accident, but did not appear to be bad, the crime is not inferior. The lower court appears to have determined a fine more reduced than the summary order in consideration of the above favorable circumstances, and the lower court appears to have determined a fine more reduced than the summary order, and taking into account all other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, occupation, family relationship, circumstances leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after committing the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.