The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of erroneous determination of facts, the victim who was adopted by the defendant did not shock the victim with the vehicle at the time of the mistake of facts, but was at the price of the vehicle by the defendant's hand and went beyond his center.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) We examine the argument of misunderstanding of facts. The defendant asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the original judgment, and the court below rejected the above argument in detail under the title of "decision on the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel". A thorough examination by comparing the judgment of the court below with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant. 2) Accordingly, the argument of misunderstanding of facts is without merit.

B. According to the records on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court determined a punishment in consideration of various sentencing grounds, such as the fact that the number of records subject to punishment for the same kind of crime has been multiple times, the error has not been divided, the damage has not been recovered, the victim’s mistake has contributed to the occurrence of an accident, and the injury inflicted on the victim is relatively minor. 2) The lower court did not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the grounds that new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial, and even considering the various sentencing grounds revealed in the oral argument, the lower court’s sentencing is too too unreasonable and does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Therefore, the argument on unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

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