2. Determination of the instant accident is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, such as the fact that there was a serious result that the victim’s death could not be observed due to the instant accident, and the Defendant’s failure to take advantage of the victim’s bereaved family members, etc.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognizes all of his criminal acts and reflects on the fact that the occurrence of the accident in this case seems to have affected the victim's negligence, that the defendant made efforts to reach an agreement with the victim's bereaved family members, that it appears that the defendant made efforts to recover damage caused by the accident in this case, such as deposit of KRW 30 million as the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim's bereaved family members, that the vehicle operated by the defendant was covered by comprehensive insurance, that the detention of the defendant is likely to have a significant impact on the defendant's family's livelihood because the defendant supports his children and women with disabilities, and that the social relationship of the defendant seems to be relatively clear.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the Defendant, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable. Therefore, 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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.