A. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Circumstances favorable to the defendant are as follows.

The Defendant is against the instant crime.

In this case, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration is not high and the driving distance is not long.

The defendant supports two children and the mother in a state with poor health.

Circumstances unfavorable to the defendant are as follows:

Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence in June 2005 for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and two-year suspended sentence in October 21, 2014 for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and committed again the instant crime during the suspended sentence period even though he had the record of being sentenced to a fine in 2002, 2010 and 2013, the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the suspended sentence period. In relation to the foregoing past record, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at 0.190% at the time of 205, 181% at October 201, 2013, and 305% at around October 301, 2014. In fact, the Defendant again committed the instant crime. In full view of the Defendant’s age, character, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, etc., or all of the circumstances and circumstances revealed in the record, the Defendant did not appear to have committed the instant crime.

All the arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.