A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of probation, two years of community service order, 200 hours of community service order, and 40 hours of order to attend a compliance driving lecture) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. As to the judgment and the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant are as follows: (a) the Defendant was punished twice by drinking driving; (b) the Defendant was punished once by drinking alcohol measurement refusal; and (c) the blood alcohol concentration is high.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant has been recognized as committing the crime and reflects it, and that there is no criminal record exceeding the fine, etc. are favorable conditions to the defendant.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, health status, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions appearing in the instant records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentencing is not deemed to be too light or heavy beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the prosecutor and the defendant's argument of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

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.