2. The offense of this case committed by the Defendant, even though the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to his/her act of drinking alcohol refusal, even though he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to his/her act of refusing to measure drinking, is not very appropriate.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized and led to the instant crime; (b) the degree of injury of the victim caused by the instant crime is relatively excessive; (c) the victim did not reach an agreement with the victim; (d) the vehicle involved in the accident appears to have been subject to comprehensive motor vehicle insurance to recover considerable damage; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime; and (e) other circumstances constituting the condition for the instant sentencing as indicated in the trial process, such as the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., and the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s allegation above 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 prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.