2. In the judgment, each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant while driving a vehicle without a driver's license, and the defendant escaped after causing the death accident by shocking the damaged person on the crosswalk. In light of the purpose of the crime and the degree of damage, the criminal liability is grave, and there is a history of punishment for driving without a driver's license, etc., which are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, however, the defendant is not immediately left the place immediately after the occurrence of the accident in this case, but the victim's family, economic circumstances, age, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the result of the crime, circumstances after the sentence of the judgment below, and the changes in circumstances revealed in the arguments in this case, such as the following facts: (a) the victim's family members and the bereaved family members have agreed to punish the defendant; (b) the victim's family members do not want punishment; (c) the victim's family members have considerable time of accommodation; and (d) the defendant's will have a relatively obvious social ties relation with the defendant, such as the defendant's family members, economic circumstances, age, the defendant's motive and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and whether the change in circumstances occurred after the sentence of the judgment below, etc., are considered to be unreasonable and unreasonable within a reasonable and appropriate scope.

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 groundless.