2. The instant crime was committed on the broom road by the Defendant, who is a co-defendant and speed competition with the lower court, driving more than 70 km at a limited speed, and the central line was invaded while driving the taxi, which was in operation in the future, resulting in the victims’ death or serious injury, and thus, the relevant criminal liability is very serious.

I would like to say.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is deeply against his/her own mistake; (b) the injured victim and the deceased’s bereaved family members are not subject to the Defendant’s punishment by mutual agreement; (c) the said victim and the deceased’s bereaved family members do not have any history of punishment; (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment; (b) motive and background of the crime; (c) the means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the application of the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, including the circumstances before and after the crime; and (d) the punishment imposed by the lower court

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.

However, since it is apparent that Article 38(2) of the Criminal Act has been omitted in the application of Article 38(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act in the application of the law of the judgment below, it is added ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1

.