2. The crime of this case is established that the Defendant’s negligence while driving while under the influence of alcohol with 0.05% of alcohol level 0.05% and caused the death of the victim E, which caused the death by shocking the pedestrian signal, etc. to red-fluoring, etc. from green flashing, etc., and the crime is bad in light of the content and result of the crime, and there is a need to strictly punish the death by drinking driving, and the Defendant has a history of being punished by a fine for one time due to drinking driving.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime, thereby contravening the mistake; (b) the victim E also was at considerable negligence in the occurrence of the instant traffic accident; (c) the Defendant’s bereaved family members do not want the Defendant’s punishment by mutual consent with the bereaved family members of the victim; and (d) the Defendant’s age, environment, family relationship; (b) background leading to the instant crime; and (c) circumstances leading to the instant crime and circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too 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.