The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the Defendant to the above punishment by taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) the physical damage caused by the automobile comprehensive insurance subscribed by the Defendant appears to have been recovered; and (b) the Defendant was punished three times (two times a fine in 2015, 2016, two times a suspended sentence of imprisonment in 2017, one time a suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor in 2017). However, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the above punishment by taking into account the aforementioned circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the occurrence of a physical accident that conflicts with three vehicles parked in a full state of 0.27

Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the court below were without significant changes in the sentencing conditions compared with the original court, and the sentencing conditions stated in the records of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, health and property status, family relationship and social ties, relation to victims, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., are not deemed unfair because the sentencing of the court below is excessively unreasonable beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

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