The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. Although the judgment of the defendant had a history of criminal punishment several times due to the crime of past violence, he/she committed the crime of injury in this case, thereby causing injury to the victim D, such as a 4 to 8-hour breakout, etc., and the defendant is driving under influence of alcohol.

In light of the fact that the defendant runs away without taking relief measures despite traffic accidents and is also under investigation, it seems necessary to punish him strictly.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that the defendant agreed with all victims, that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine due to the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and that all the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case including the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

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.