The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the violation of the Road Traffic Act among the facts charged in the instant case by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant, although necessary to take measures, such as aiding and abetting the victim by causing a traffic accident in which damaged vehicles are charged, the Defendant left the scene without taking such measures. Therefore, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, by misapprehending the legal principles, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, the lower court: (a) based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court: (b) the Defendant requested an insurance company to report via a phone to his mother; (c) the Defendant requested his/her her her her son and her son and her her son and her son and her son and her son and her her son and her her son and her her her son and her her her son and her son to return to the accident site; (d) the Defendant promptly arrived at the accident site; (e) the Defendant’s son and her son and her son and her son and her her son and her son and her son were reported to the police officer on August 20, 2016 at the accident site; (e) the Defendant did not leave the accident site; and (e) the Defendant’s her son and her her son caused a traffic accident to the victim.