The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, who is aware of the fact, will be placed on a one-lane line in the direction of the Defendant’s proceeding due to the primary shock with the preceding vehicle.

Since it could not have been predicted, occupational negligence cannot be recognized, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant's vehicle was alive at the time of serving the victim, so the relationship between the defendant's act and the death of the victim cannot be recognized.

B. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport in the lower court’s determination as to the factual mistake, and the lower court rejected the above assertion by providing a detailed statement in the column of “determination on the Defendant B and his defense counsel’s assertion.” In light of the records, the lower court’s determination is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts, as otherwise alleged by the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts is without merit.

B. Determination 1 on the unfair argument of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on the statutory penalty. In our criminal litigation law that takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of directness, there is a unique area for determination of sentencing under Article 1.

In addition, in light of these circumstances and the ex post facto in-depth nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, the first instance judgment is reversed solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court is pronounced.