2. The crime of this case is a case where the defendant escaped after causing a traffic accident, and is not good in the nature of the crime. Nevertheless, the fact that the victim want to be punished by severe punishment due to the failure to agree with the victim is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in full view of all the factors of sentencing including the following: (a) the degree of injury and damage to property suffered by the victim is relatively minor; (b) the harming vehicle is covered by a comprehensive car insurance; and (c) the Defendant’s re-afusing the damaged vehicle in the course of escape does not seem to be an act for the purpose of causing the victim, such as the victim’s assertion; and (d) the sentence of the lower court is too unjustifiable.

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