2. The following facts are: (a) the Defendant recognized each of the instant offenses; (b) deposited one million won for the victim of the instant injury on June 8, 2016, which was following the pronouncement of the lower judgment; and (c) partially erred by the injured victim, etc., are factors for sentencing favorable to the Defendant.

However, in light of the background of the crime of injury in this case, the method of the crime, the victim's injury and degree, etc., the poor quality of the crime, the victim's refusal to reach an agreement and the defendant's punishment are sought, the crime of violation of road traffic law (unlicensed driving) and the crime of violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act in addition to the crime of injury, and the submission of a written statement on the ground of a false witness who is J in the investigation process of this case, etc., there is a doubt that the defendant's mistake is truely divided into one's own mistake, etc., and thus

In addition, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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.