Therefore, although the defendant and the prosecutor appealed, the prosecutor does not dispute only the assertion of unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal and not guilty.

Therefore, the non-guilty part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court below was excluded from the list of the parties, and thus, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below is followed, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year’s imprisonment without prison labor) is too unreasonable.

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

3. The judgment of this case is an unfavorable circumstance that the defendant received the victim who dried the crosswalk while driving a vehicle in violation of the signal, and the defendant's negligence is considerable, and the result of this case leads to the death of the victim. The defendant committed the crime of this case during the repeated crime period, and the defendant tried to avoid criminal liability by causing another person to be aware of the driver in a false manner.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant voluntarily surrendered at the expiration of 10 days after the accident, and that the defendant reflects his mistake after the accident, that the victim's bereaved family members and the victim's bereaved family members have agreed smoothly, and that the defendant has no criminal record of the same kind.

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.

4. Conclusion.