The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the injury suffered by the victim is minor; (b) the Defendant’s vehicle, other than the Defendant’s vehicle, agreed separately with the victim; and (c) the Defendant’s primary offender and reflects his depth on the crime; (b) the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and forty (40 hours of attending the law-abiding lecture) is too heavy.

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015), compared to the lower court’s judgment, there is no particular change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared with those of the lower court. In full view of the reasons for sentencing revealed in the course of the argument of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and so, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

The defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. 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.