2. The sentencing conditions favorable to the Defendant are the first offender who had no record of criminal punishment prior to the instant crime, against whom the Defendant recognized the instant crime, and the victim’s injury was not severe.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) four victims who violated the Defendant’s duty of care in the course of performing their duties were not subject to an agreement with the victims; (b) the Defendant did not suffer from an injury to the Defendant until the Defendant was in the trial; (c) the lower court took into account the sentencing conditions favorable to the Defendant; (d) reduced the fine amount of the summary order by taking into account the sentencing conditions favorable to the Defendant; and (e) there was no change of circumstances likely to change the lower court’s punishment at the trial; and (e) other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable; and therefore, (e) the Defendant and his defense counsel’s unjust assertion

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.