A. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (three months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. The following determination is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant.

Even before the instant case, the Defendant had been subject to criminal punishment on five occasions, including imprisonment without prison labor and suspension of execution due to without prison labor, but was again driving without obtaining a license.

The Defendant did not have obtained a driver's license at the beginning, and the distance of driving without the license of this case is not less than 8 km.

It is necessary to strictly punish the defendant in light of the defendant's non-licensed driving behavior and the attitude of lack of compliance consciousness.

On the other hand, it is advantageous to the fact that the defendant scrapped the vehicle that he would not drive again before the driver's license is obtained, and supports three children including two minor children.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the details of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc., as well as the various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and pleadings, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too weak or unreasonable, and thus, the prosecutor and the Defendant’s assertion are without merit.

3. If so, the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant 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.