2. The judgment of this case is based on the negligence of the defendant in violation of the signal, that the degree of the negligence of the defendant is relatively heavy and the degree of the injury of the victim is also minor.

In addition, the victim is strongly trying to punish the defendant.

However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant had no criminal history prior to the instant case, the Defendant’s vehicle was covered by a comprehensive insurance, the Defendant deposited a certain amount of money in the depth of the Defendant, and the order to attend a law-abiding lecture as well as the suspension of the execution of imprisonment without prison labor, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and family environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unfair, and thus, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit (the scope of specific liability liability against the victim’s victim can be determined by civil procedure such as civil procedure). 3. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit.