A. The sentence of the court below (one year of suspended execution for four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above-mentioned sentence of the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant recognizes his mistake, and the defendant's vehicle appears to have been damaged by being subscribed to a comprehensive insurance, and the defendant has the power to suspend indictment twice and has no record of criminal punishment is a favorable condition.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is disadvantageous to the fact that the defendant left the scene without taking necessary measures despite having the occurrence of a traffic accident, and the case is not less vulnerable in light of the degree of damage of the damaged vehicle, and that it is not agreed with the victim until this court.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is 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.