2. In a case where there is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The instant accident occurred due to negligence operated by the Defendant beyond the limited speed, and the criminal liability of the Defendant is not easy in that one of the victims dies.

However, in light of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the court below's decision to suspend the execution of imprisonment without prison labor cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion and is excessively unreasonable, in light of the following factors: (a) the defendant's decision to suspend the execution of imprisonment without prison labor was made to the defendant; (b) the victim was made to turn to the left without protection in the opposite part of the defendant's proceeding direction; and (c) the victim was found to have contributed to the death of the victim at ordinary low-income disease (high-class, urology, and cardiopulmonary disease).

Therefore, prosecutor's 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 appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.