2. The judgment of unfair sentencing refers to the case where the sentence of the judgment of the court below is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(2) In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s negligence and the injury suffered by the victim was a primary offender, that the Defendant was agreed with the victim, that the Defendant subscribed to an automobile comprehensive insurance policy, and that the Defendant’s economic situation is difficult, etc., taking into account the favorable circumstances, and sentenced the above punishment to the Defendant. In full view of all the factors of sentencing indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court did not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, did not appear to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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