The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspended execution for one year of imprisonment, one hundred and sixty hours of community service order, and forty hours of compliance driving order) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant committed an act of escaping without taking necessary measures, such as relief measures, despite the occurrence of a traffic accident that causes human damage by the central line.

In the lower court, the Defendant did not seem to have any reflection on his own mistake, such as the Defendant denied the intention of escape, and the victims did not appear to have made efforts to recover the damage, because the Defendant was aware of the occurrence of a traffic accident due to a storm.

However, the defendant was found to have committed a mistake in the first instance, and the victim did not want to be punished for the defendant by mutual consent with the victims.

In full view of these circumstances and the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is rejected, on the ground that the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal 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.