The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the defendant appears to have the attitude to recognize and reflect his/her criminal act; (b) the record of criminal punishment in Korea has not been confirmed; and (c) the fact that the vehicle operated by the defendant was covered by liability insurance and the medical expenses, etc.

However, the crime of this case is a case where the defendant did not take any relief measures while driving without a license, and the nature of the crime was extremely poor, the victims suffered injuries, especially the victim E suffered injuries, such as suffering from a brush, etc. requiring eight weeks' medical treatment, and it seems that there is no fact that the defendant recovered damage to the victims of the disaster or received a letter from the victims, in addition to the money paid by the insurance company, the defendant's age, environment, sex behavior, the process and motive of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's sentencing cannot be acknowledged as unfair because it is excessively excessive and unfair. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices (Provided, That the judgment of the court below is obvious that the omission of “Article 37(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act of 1. Concurrent Crimes” was clearly made between the first sentence of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Act during the period of 8 and 9 of the applicable column of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus, it is corrected to add it ex officio pursuant to