The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal - The lower court’s punishment (for six months of imprisonment and two years of suspension of execution) is too heavy (the Defendant stated “the fact-finding” in the petition of appeal as the grounds for appeal, but the Defendant withdrawn it and claimed only unfair sentencing.). 2. There was no special change in circumstances in the trial concerning the sentencing on the grounds of appeal, and the lower court already determined the punishment by taking full account of all circumstances, including the circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal.

In particular, in full view of the background and scale of the instant accident, the attitude of the Defendant after the commission of the crime, as well as other factors of sentencing indicated in the record of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion in sentencing.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted (On the other hand, the defendant's argument that the shock level of the defendant and the victim's vehicle should be corrected since it is erroneous in the indictment of this case. In light of the main direction prior to the accident of each vehicle, the above argument is persuasive, but it is not related to the elements of this case, which are accident caused by the defendant's negligence, and it is not related to the result of the judgment. Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, under Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the "social service order" in the part of the judgment of the court below is clear that it is a clerical error, and it shall be corrected ex officio.