A. The sentence of the lower court (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable for the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) to be sentenced to imprisonment (eight months).

B. The Prosecutor’s (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We also examine the judgment and prosecutor’s improper claims for sentencing.

In our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of public trial-oriented and directness, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in the case where the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment. As such, there was no change in the circumstance and details of the instant accident, the circumstance and circumstances after the accident, and the situation after the accident, and the situation after the accident, which caused the shock death without viewing two persons who were going on the road due to the preceding accident, even if the preceding accident was not ordinarily foreseeable, the road was obstructed by the Defendant’s death without any prior consent, such as the fact that there was no change in the age of the victim of the instant accident, and the fact that the victim’s bereaved family members and the victim’s bereaved family members were able to suffer from the accident.