The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant’s mistake was seriously reflected in the Defendant’s life under confinement for the remaining six months in the course of committing the instant crime, and that the victims of traffic accidents are not subject to punishment against the Defendant by agreement with the victims of traffic accidents. In light of the above, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. The current Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, has the unique area of the first instance court with respect to the determination of sentencing. As such, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in the first instance court where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court appears to have determined the sentence by sufficiently taking into account the above favorable circumstances asserted in the first instance court. In so doing, the lower court’s determination of sentencing is too inappropriate in light of the motive for the crime of aiding and abetting the offender to commit the instant crime, the degree of damage caused by traffic accident, and there is no special change in circumstances that should change the sentence of the lower court after the pronouncement of the lower court, and considering all the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, motive, means and consequence after the crime, etc.

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.