The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (not in action after the accident) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (non-licenseed driving) among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts beyond the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on crimes of violating the Road Traffic Act (not taking measures after the accident).

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal may be filed only for a case on which death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.