A. The sentence of the lower court (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant is driving a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance without a driver’s license.

The negligence of violating the signal causes personal and material damage to the victims of the traffic accident, and in light of the background, method, and contents of the crime, the crime is not good, the victims agree with the victims or did not take any measures to recover the damage until the trial is the case, and the defendant has been punished for suspended execution of imprisonment due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, etc.

The circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant is waiting for committing a crime and is against the victim, the degree of injury suffered by the victims is relatively small, the defendant has no record of being punished by imprisonment with prison labor, and there is no record of criminal punishment after 2005.

In full view of all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is deemed to be appropriate, too heavy, or is deemed to be unreasonable because it is too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.