2. The judgment of the Defendant committed the instant crime even though the Defendant had the record of punishment for drinking driving, and the fact that the risk of the instant crime was realized due to the occurrence of a traffic accident while driving under drinking is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, it is favorable to the defendant that the defendant does not repeat again while reflecting his mistake, that the distance of drinking driving is relatively short, that the physical damage caused by the traffic accident has been recovered, and that there are some circumstances that can be considered in the living environment of the defendant.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant records and pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the lower court’s sentence is too unjustifiable.

Therefore, prosecutor's 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, among the criminal power column at the bottom of the first page of the judgment of the court below, the term "fine of one million won" is "two million won", and the term "Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act" in the second page 15 is obvious that it is a clerical error in Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act. Thus, it is corrected as above in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.