The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the fact-misunderstanding or misunderstanding of legal principles (as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) the victims suffered bodily injury, such as the speed and direction of the vehicle and the damaged vehicle, the degree of shock caused by the collision, the degree and degree of the victim's injury caused by the accident in this case, especially the victims who suffered bodily injury, such as dynasium, etc., which is difficult to confirm due to the accident in this case, divided the normal conversation with the defendant immediately after the accident, and specifically explained the police officers dispatched to the scene of the accident, etc., they suffered bodily injury to the extent that they

It is difficult to readily conclude.

However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of suspended sentence of one year, protection observation, community service order 160 hours, and order to attend a compliance driving 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following facts, the victim D and F did not have any evidentiary evidence before the court below's judgment, and there was no evidentiary evidence before the court below's judgment, and there was no evidentiary evidence before the court below's judgment, and the victim D and F did not suffer injury due to the accident of this case, in light of the fact that there was no evidentiary evidence before the court below's judgment or during the period from January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2017, and that there was no evidentiary evidence related to the prosecution and during the period from March 31, 2017.