The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) there is no fact that the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle at the time and place specified in the facts charged, has shocked the victim’s rear wheels, and has broken off the victim.

2. The judgment of the court below is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined. ① The victim consistently stated at the police and court of the court below that “the defendant used on the wind floor with the rear wheels of the bicycle on which the victim was on driving a car,” ② The victim stated to the effect that “the defendant was on driving a car with the rear wheels of the bicycle,” but the victim stated to the effect that “the defendant was on driving a car with the rear wheels of the bicycle.” However, this is merely a statement made in consideration of the situation at the time without witnessing the shock (No. 13 page of the evidence record) and it is difficult to deny the credibility of the victim’s above statement solely for that reason; ③ the defendant was driving the car above at a speed of 5 week, ③ the defendant did not have a large sound during the process of shocking the bicycle wheels on the part of the victim, ④ The victim did not have a witness’s oral appearance, ④ The defendant did not have any witness’s oral appearance without the victim’s consent of the above 2nd trial.”