The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (7 million won in penalty) that the court below rendered by the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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 lower court also determined a sentence against the Defendant by taking into account (i) the following factors: (a) the Defendant was under a disadvantage against the Defendant; (b) the Defendant was in a situation where the Defendant was unable to memory the situation at the time of the instant accident; (c) the size of the accident was considerable and many victims; (b) the Defendant was in contravention of his/her mistake; (d) the Defendant was in contravention of his/her own mistake; (c) there was no history of punishment prior

The sentencing of the court below appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope by fully taking into account the above conditions of the sentencing, and there is no special change in circumstances that are different from the sentencing conditions of the court below until the trial is in question.

In addition, even if considering all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above 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 grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.