The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment shows that the defendant's negligence is recognized and reflected.

However, considering the records of this case and various sentencing conditions expressed in the trial process, the sentencing of the court below is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and there is no change in new sentencing conditions that can be deemed to be unfair to maintain the sentencing of the court below in the trial proceedings, in view of the following: (a) the act of this case was committed during the suspension of execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (i.e., the act of violation of the Road Traffic Act) and the act of violation of the Road Traffic Act (i.e., the act of this case; (b) the defendant committed a number of identical crimes, such as the act of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents; (c) the defendant was unable to be used from his bereaved family members; and (d) there is no fact that there

Therefore, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable because it is too large.

3. If so, 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.