2. The crime of this case in 2008 is a case in which the Defendant had been issued two summary orders with drinking driving in 2008, and again carried out drinking driving again in 2012 and caused a traffic accident, and the Defendant escaped after causing a traffic accident, and the Defendant’s liability for the crime of this case is heavy, and is subject to strict punishment.

However, the Defendant: (a) went off the vehicle after the accident; (b) left the vehicle at the scene of the accident; (c) left the towing vehicle at around 500 meters away from the scene of the accident; and (d) returned the towing vehicle to the site of the accident even after approximately 15 minutes passed from the accident after leaving the towing vehicle by leaving the vehicle in contact with the victim; (b) there are no criminal records of the same kind other than the aforementioned two-time drinking criminal records; (c) the Defendant has committed a serious violation against the victim’s personal injury; (d) the victims are relatively minor; and (e) the vehicle of the Defendant is covered by a comprehensive insurance policy (under the traffic accident and the written confirmation of payment resolution, the victims’ age, character and conduct, family environment, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate to the extent that the sentencing of the instant case is reversed; and (e) the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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