The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects the gist of the grounds for appeal, that the defendant is in a position to receive blood speculation due to the extension of the time, etc., and that the defendant lives as a basic livelihood security recipient at a level of KRW 350,000 per month, punishment imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Taking into account the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, the instant crime was committed by the Defendant, even if it was considered that the Defendant destroyed the damaged vehicle due to negligence that did not turn on the direction while driving a rocketing vehicle that was not covered by the liability insurance, and changing the lane, and the Defendant did not seem to be somewhat. In the past, the Defendant had the past records of having been punished several times of crimes related to road traffic (two times of suspended sentence of imprisonment, six times of fines) such as the violation of the Road Traffic Act, the Road Traffic Act, the violation of the Road Traffic Act, the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, such as the violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, etc., the Defendant did not compensate the owner of the damaged vehicle for any damage, and the Defendant did not add a false phone number to the employees of the insurance company immediately after the instant crime. In full view of all other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, the above Defendant’s punishment sentenced by the lower court is unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.