The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the reasons for appeal is that the defendant escaped to his country during the investigation, the damage of the damaged vehicle was not compensated, and the victim G, the owner of the damaged vehicle, wishes to punish the defendant, etc., the punishment of the court below (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unfasible and unfair.

2. Since the current Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has a unique area in the sentencing determination, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing determination in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Considering the circumstances asserted by the prosecutor as an element of sentencing unfavorable to the defendant in the grounds of appeal in Korea, the lower court’s sentence is deemed to be reasonable and unreasonable, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; (b) the circumstances after the crime; and (c) the circumstances after the crime; and (d) circumstances in which new sentencing materials that may change the sentence of the lower court were not added in the trial, etc., as well as the fact that the Defendant has no capacity to impose any

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

(However, Article 25(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018; hereinafter “former Road Traffic Act”) in Part 3 of the judgment below is clear that the “former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 15530, Mar. 27, 2018)” is a clerical error, and ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.