The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the substance and nature of the instant crime and the fact that it is impossible to agree with the victim’s bereaved family members, etc., the sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment without prison labor and two years of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The crime of this case is one of the following circumstances: (a) the crime of this case resulted in death by shocking the victim who was faced with the brake device while driving a vehicle and driving on the road through delivery by mistake, and caused the death by neglecting the speed device; (b) the degree of negligence and the result of the crime; and (c) the fact that the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim’s bereaved family members, etc. is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized all the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant appears to have self-responsibility and reflect on the victim’s death; (c) the insurance company that concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with the Defendant for the instant motor vehicle paid KRW 86 million to the victim’s bereaved family members by agreement; (d) the Defendant additionally deposited KRW 20 million in the lower court for the victim’s bereaved family members; and (e) the Defendant additionally deposited at the trial; and (e) the Defendant was sentenced to a fine twice in 198 and 191; and (e) other favorable conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, family environment, health conditions, etc., that are favorable to the Defendant’s punishment, and thus, cannot be deemed unfair, 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.