2. In full view of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects the fact that there is no history of punishment exceeding the fine, etc., but considering the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the nature of the offense is not less than that of the Defendant in light of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, or the background and content of the instant crime, etc., it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable in light of the circumstances that the Defendant’

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (see Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, however, Articles 148-2(2)2 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, which read “Article 148-2(2)2 and Article 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act” as “Article 148-2(1)2 and Article 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act,” among the application of the law of the lower court ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.