A. The sentence of the court below (one year of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable in light of the defendant's health condition, etc.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant, by negligence, caused the death of the victim by shocking the center line of the Defendant, and thereby causing the death of the victim, there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant in light of his/her duty of care, seriousness of the outcome, etc.

However, there are extenuating circumstances to consider the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant is seriously against his mistake, that the vehicle of this case is covered by a comprehensive insurance, that the victim's bereaved family is paid insurance money, that the defendant deposited 20 million won for the victim's bereaved family in the court below, and that there is an agreement with the victim's bereaved family.

In this context, the Supreme Court's recommended sentence of the Sentencing Committee is from August to June of the Treasury, the traffic accident group, the general traffic accident group, the type of the second type, the special person (no person), the basic area, the scope of the recommended punishment (in the event of death in the Treasury, positive: penalty is not imposed). The main reason for the suspension of execution is that the death occurs (in the event of death in the Treasury, positive: penalty is not imposed). In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too heavy or unreasonable.

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