The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is that the punishment of the fine of 6 million won imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

In light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant agreed with the victims related to three vehicles out of the four vehicles damaged by the accident in this case at the lower court; and (b) the Defendant led to the confession of and reflect against the crimes; (c) the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the owner of the vehicle up to the trial; (d) the Defendant did not endeavor to recover the damage of the said victims; and (e) the Defendant was at fault of the Defendant in this case, which caused the traffic accident by overcoming the central line; (c) the vehicle driven by the Defendant was not subject to mandatory insurance; and (d) the quality of the crime in this case was extremely poor; (e) the Defendant’s history of punishment reaches 10 times; and (v) the Defendant’s age, age, character, motive of the Defendant; (e) the Defendant’s environment and means of the crime in this case; and (e) the circumstances that led to the occurrence of the traffic accident, including the vehicle’s motive and circumstances, are considered appropriate and unfair.

Therefore, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that there are no grounds for appeal. However, in the application of the lower judgment, the relevant provisions of the Automobile Management Act and the “Automobile Compensation Guarantee Act” of the relevant criminal facts among the statutes of the lower court are as follows: “former Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 13686, Dec. 29, 2015)” and “former Automobile Compensation Guarantee Act (amended by Act No. 12987, Jan. 6, 2015)”; and ex officio correction is made in accordance with Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.