2. As the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol without a driver’s license, was locked on the road while driving the motor vehicle, and was demanded by the police officers to take a drinking test and present their identification cards on the road, the Defendant presented the driver’s license under the name of a private village partner, and inflicted an injury on the police officers in the course of escape by rapid departure of the motor vehicle.

Such crimes could cause serious harm to police officers or the general public by nullifying the legitimate performance of official duties, and the responsibility for such crimes is not easy in that they could cause serious harm to human life.

In addition, the defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had been sentenced three times or more due to drinking driving in the past.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime to reflect his mistake in depth, and has no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine.

The defendant does not want to punish the defendant in consultation with the damaged police officers.

The defendant's wife and three children must support the defendant, and the defendant's wife also wanted to keep the defendant's wife.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., as well as all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime, and where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. It does not seem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too un

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.