The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The decision-making defendant has tried not to repeat the crime of this case by breaking his depth in depth.

The degree of injury suffered by the victims of the instant traffic accident is relatively minor, and the defendant does not want to punish the victims more by mutual consent with the victims.

It is also recognized that the circumstances in which the defendant should support the mother's mother alone.

However, the crime of this case committed by the Defendant, while driving without a license, caused a traffic accident by negligence committed by the central line, resulting in damage to the victims’ human resources and property, but failed to immediately stop and take necessary measures, such as providing relief to the victims, and thus, the relevant criminal liability is not weak.

The extent of the Defendant’s occupational negligence is not weak, and the Defendant not only has been subject to criminal punishment several times due to traffic crimes, including suspended sentence, but also has been sentenced to suspended sentence due to the same kind of crime, and has committed the instant crime again in the short term.

As above, it is inevitable to punish the defendant in the sense that he committed the crime of this case even though he was under the period of suspension of execution.

The judgment below

In full view of the fact that there is no new data or change of circumstances that can be considered in sentencing, and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, etc., the sentence that the court below sentenced cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.

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