2. Determination is based on the following: (a) the occurrence of the result of the victim’s death at the scene due to the instant accident; (b) the bereaved family and the bereaved family wishing to punish the Defendant without agreement with the bereaved family members up to the trial; and (c) the Defendant’s history of punishment for traffic-related crimes reaches several times, etc. are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the instant accident was committed against a victim who was driven on the road because the Defendant had no light lighting facility at 2:0 p.m. at 2:00s of the new wall and caused the Defendant to become aware of the road that was sucked in rain, and there are extenuating circumstances such as the victim’s negligence in the occurrence of the accident, such as the fact that the Defendant seems to have contributed significantly to the occurrence of the accident; the Defendant led to the confession and reflect of the instant crime; the Defendant’s vehicle is covered by a comprehensive insurance; the Defendant’s vehicle is deposited in a comprehensive insurance; the Defendant’s deposit of KRW 30 million for the bereaved family members; and other circumstances that are attached to the sentencing indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, occupation, and family relationship, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.