All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment imposed by the court below (4 months) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the punishment imposed by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. We examine both parties’ assertion of unfair sentencing.

The fact that the defendant is led to confession and reflect, that the defendant deposited 3 million won for the victim F (hereinafter referred to as "victim"), that the defendant is in a position to support two children of his wife and minor, that the defendant maintains his livelihood with daily labor, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed on the part of the defendant who violated the duty of front-time care and caused serious injury to the victim, such as memory disorder, judgment disorder, etc. due to degradation of the brain function of the non-merchants of treatment days, the vehicle of the defendant is covered by the liability insurance, the defendant submitted the written agreement in the name of the victim in the first instance trial, and again submitted the written agreement in the first instance trial. However, even though the above written agreement was made without the victim's family participation in the situation where the victim's family member could have been judged to have lost brain function at present, it cannot be deemed that a substantial agreement was made, and the victim's family member wanted to punish the defendant for the above reason, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the circumstances seen earlier, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant pleadings, the lower court’s sentence imposed on the Defendant cannot be deemed as heavy or unreasonable as it is unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the defendant and the prosecutor.