Judgment

In that the defendant's blood alcohol concentration of 0.13% conflict with the damaged vehicle by driving a signal violation under the influence of alcohol and suffered from the driver's injury in need of two weeks of treatment, the crime is very heavy.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s primary offender, the fact that the Defendant’s driving vehicle is subscribed to an automobile comprehensive insurance (Evidence No. 45-46 of the evidence record), the Defendant agreed with the investigative agency, and the Defendant’s wife was the victim (proponed by the evidence No. 23-25 of the trial record, No. 58-61 of the evidence record), the victim’s injury is relatively minor, and other sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair.

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