A. The Defendant (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (an amount of KRW 10,000,00) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s above sentence is too unhued and unfair.

2. The judgment of the Defendant recognized the instant crime, and the Defendant did not have any previous conviction for about ten years before and after the last alcohol driving (2010), and the Defendant arrived at the apartment complex in which he resides by proxy after drinking, and was allowed to drive the instant drinking to move his parking location within the apartment complex. As such, there are extenuating circumstances in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the vehicle driven by the Defendant is a condition of being covered by the comprehensive automobile insurance.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant had been sentenced to a fine three times, the alcohol level (0.142%) of the blood of this case is considerably high, and the traffic accident that causes two vehicles to shock by driving in a narrow apartment parking lot is disadvantageous.

There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered by this court, and comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sex, family relationship, circumstances surrounding the crime, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

All of the arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor are rejected.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor 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.