The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in the grounds for appeal is examined only to the extent of supplement in case of a statement of grounds for appeal filed on August 12, 2016 by a defense counsel after the deadline for submitting the grounds for appeal.

The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the charges of this case, although the vehicle with the above vehicle driven by the defendant at the front section of the vehicle operated by the defendant was not negligent in neglecting the duty of the front section and the accident of this case occurred because the defendant did not neglect the duty of the front section of this case because it was a vehicle with a general hub, other than a vehicle equipped with the quilalamer-prevention system, which is not a vehicle equipped with the quilamer-type system, but a vehicle operated by the defendant was operated in the front section of the vehicle, and it was difficult for the defendant to avoid the accident of this case and the defendant as the vehicle driven by the defendant immediately after the collision of the victim, and the causal relation between the accident of this case and the death of the victim of this case was not recognized.

B. The lower court’s sentence (two years of suspended execution in one year of imprisonment without prison labor, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. On the ground of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower court’s judgment, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in its reasoning and determination under the title “determination of the Defendant’s assertion” in the judgment. 2) The lower court’s judgment and the lower court’s judgment were duly adopted and examined.