2. Although the Defendant had already been punished three times due to drinking driving and twice without a license, the Defendant drives a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance without a driver’s license in the state of 0.242% alcohol concentration in blood while driving without a driver’s license. The instant crime is likely to lead to a large degree of criticism in that the Defendant caused an accident that causes the shock of two vehicles and was discovered in the process of handling the vehicle.

However, in full view of the fact that the defendant committed a crime and commits a mistake against himself/herself, and that he/she does not repeat again while disposing of the vehicle used for the crime, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's health, age, occupation, and circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

3. As such, 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 by the court below (Provided, That the application of the law of the court below to “1. Selection of punishment: Determination of imprisonment with prison labor” is obvious that it is a clerical error, and it is corrected ex officio as adding it.)