2. The crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, since the defendant was under the influence of alcohol 0.09% and caused a traffic accident while driving the vehicle and causing a traffic accident, and was damaged by the victim, and did not take necessary measures such as aiding and abetting the victims, etc. even though he did not take necessary measures, and the quality of the crime is not good due to the escape. The defendant has already been subject to criminal punishment of fines for the same kind of crime, and the driving under the influence of alcohol is a crime that may cause a serious danger to the life and property of others.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case and reflects the mistake in depth, there is no record of criminal punishment heavier than the fine before, and that there is a relatively minor degree of injury suffered by the victim due to the traffic accident of this case, that the victims have agreed with the victims smoothly, and that the defendant would not repeat the same mistake again is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., as seen above, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

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