2. In light of the fact that the Defendant was punished for drunk driving four times, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being sentenced to a suspended sentence due to occupational embezzlement on December 12, 2013 and without being sentenced to a suspended sentence due to the crime of occupational embezzlement, etc. on December 12, 2013, the Defendant should be punished strictly. However, the Defendant’s recognition of and reflect on the crime, the Defendant has no criminal record of the same kind for the last five years, and the suspended sentence on the crime of occupational embezzlement, etc. as a result of the instant case seems to be harsh, and the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, and the circumstances after the crime are considered to be the conditions for the sentencing of the instant case. In full view of the various circumstances, the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be too unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing

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.