The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of probation, 40 hours of probation, 40 hours of order to attend a law-abiding lecture, 80 hours of community service order) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The negligence of the victim, who was crossing the judgment without permission, seems to have become an important cause for the traffic accident of this case, and it appears that the victim's age is 89 years old and the victim's death is one cause for the victim's death. The defendant committed all the crime of this case, the bereaved family does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the victim's bereaved family, and the defendant's comprehensive insurance on the defendant's vehicle is subscribed to.

However, due to the instant accident, the instant traffic accident occurred due to the Defendant’s negligence, which caused the death of the victim, and due to the negligence of the Defendant, who neglected to take account of the following: (a) the degree of violation of the Defendant’s duty of care is not less and less that of the Defendant; (b) the Defendant has been punished several times for the same crime; and (c) the instant crime has not been committed until one month since the immediately preceding traffic accident occurred; and (d) there is no other reason to impose strict punishment on the Defendant; and therefore, (b) there is no room to place any further

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, there is no special change of circumstances that make the original judgment and the punishment different from the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.