A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. As to the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant would not repeat again while opposing his mistake, that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant, that the victim does not want to do so by mutual consent with some victims, that physical damage caused by the crime of this case has been recovered through insurance, and that the defendant has no penalty power exceeding the fine is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant runs away without taking measures after causing traffic accidents twice a year, and during this process, the Defendant’s violation of signal signals and the central bed, thereby not having good results, and the Defendant’s serious damage, such as serious damage to the vehicle due to the instant crime, such as serious damage to the vehicle due to the serious injury, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and all of the factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant case’s records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or uneasible.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.