2. Although the victim died due to the instant crime, the Defendant did not agree with the bereaved family members.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and opposed to it.

The occurrence of a traffic accident and the expansion of damage are negligent for the victim who illegally crossed at the time of the instant case.

Defendant

In the insurance company to which the vehicle was a party, approximately KRW 90 million was paid to the victim's bereaved family, and the defendant also deposited KRW 30 million in an economically difficult situation.

There is no criminal offense exceeding a fine, and criminal offense is relatively old.

This is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

The sentencing guidelines for the establishment of the sentencing committee of the Supreme Court and the general traffic accident class 2 (the death of a traffic accident) fall under the mitigated area (special mitigation factors: the victim is at considerable negligence in the occurrence of a traffic accident or the expansion of damage). In full view of the various circumstances indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, the means and consequence of a crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

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