2. The judgment below seems to have rendered the above sentence by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant (the fact that the defendant agreed with the injured victim and is trying to reach an agreement while depositing KRW 20 million for the bereaved family members of the deceased victim) and unfavorable circumstances (the traffic accident caused by the defendant, whose license was revoked due to drinking driving, neglecting his duty of care and neglecting his/her duty of care. The result of the death of one victim and the other person's bodily injury is very significant. The case was committed by the victims who have dumped on the crosswalk while bypassing the crosswalk, and the degree of neglect of the defendant's duty of care is significant, and the defendant was also punished several times by drinking and driving without a license even before the case).

In light of the above grounds for and the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, various circumstances revealed by the circumstances after the crime, and other circumstances that the court below did not have any special circumstances or changes in circumstances to the defendant's punishment, the court below's sentencing shall be appropriate and shall not be deemed to have abused its discretion or exceeded its discretionary limits.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

(However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, ex officio the application of the judgment of the court below shall be corrected by adding "Article 38 (1) 2" to the following column of aggravated concurrent crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.