도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of eight months) is too unfluent and unfair.
2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment because new materials on sentencing have not been submitted in the trial, and considering the factors revealed in the arguments in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too unfluent and so, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
It does not appear.
Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.
3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the court below’s “a subordinate mountainous district court” in the first sentence in the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in the “ Busan District Court”, and thus, it is obvious that the ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25(1) of the