2. The degree of injury suffered by the victim due to the Defendant’s breach of the duty of care in the judgment is serious, and the fact that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim until the trial is in the trial is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant is recognized as committing the instant crime; (b) the Defendant pays part of the medical expenses for the victim; (c) the Defendant deposited KRW 5 million for the victim; and (d) there is no particular criminal record other than once punishment for the instant crime; and (e) other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime; and (b) the Prosecutor’s above assertion on unreasonable sentencing is not acceptable.

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.