The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstandings 2 through 5 occur not by the fault of the Defendant’s primary accident, but by the intention or gross negligence of the victim G. Thus, between the Defendant’s negligence and the second or fifth accident, there is no relation to the person in charge, and the victim G’s wife suffered from the first accident cannot be deemed as an injury, or merely because it is a minor fact that the victim G cannot be deemed as an injury, and there was a need to take relief measures against the victim G.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, two years of community service, 80 hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the determination of a traffic accident as to the assertion of fact, if there is a fact that the Defendant’s negligence caused the death or injury of the victim or that of a third party, not only is the case where the Defendant’s negligence caused the death or injury of the victim, but also if there is another fact, such as the negligence of the victim or a third party, etc., such fact can be ordinarily predicted (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do6206, Jul. 24, 2014). The lower court, on the grounds the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found that following the first accident, following the second accident that the victim caused the second or fifth accident to the effect that he would be able to receive the victim I who was leading to the second or fifth accident, such as taking a speed, and that there was no need for the second or fifth accident between the driver of the vehicle driving on the road and the first or fifth accident, and thus, there was no further need for the first or fifth accident between the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident and the second or fifth accident.