The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspended sentence in August of the imprisonment without prison labor) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant violated a signal and caused a traffic accident while making a U-turn, which led to the occurrence of an injury during the course of the victim’s injury, is disadvantageous.

However, it is advantageous to the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and is against the defendant, that the victim did not want the punishment for the defendant under the agreement with the victim, that the defendant was living faithfully without criminal punishment for the last 35 years, and that the piracy vehicle is joining the taxi mutual aid association.

The court below determined a punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing because new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and equity in sentencing, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is determined to be appropriate, and it does not seem to be unfair as it is excessively uneasible from the reasonable scope of discretion.

We do not accept the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.