2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is recognized that the Defendant was punished once by a fine due to drunk driving.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the foregoing penal power was not a motor vehicle, but due to drinking alcohol driving; (b) the Defendant had the attitude of reflecting the Defendant’s wrong recognition; (c) there was no change of circumstances or normal relationship to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. as indicated in the lower court’s and the oral argument, the sentence imposed by the lower court is given within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is not easy.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.