2. Although the Defendant, as a taxi driver, must observe traffic regulations more well by complying with the traffic regulations by complying with the signal, he was injured many people including passengers by shocking the taxi of the victim Franchis in violation of the signal, and in particular, the victim K suffered serious injury due to the 8th week required by the victims, although it is recognized that the Defendant did not agree with the victims, the Defendant’s mistake is against the victim while committing the crime, and there is no other criminal records other than the one sentenced to a fine for minor crimes, the Defendant’s taxi is admitted to the taxi mutual aid association, the Defendant’s economic situation is considered, the Defendant’s taxi is taking into account the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

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.