2. In a case where there is no change in the 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). Although the Defendant had a history of criminal punishment of fines three times for the same kind of crime in the past, he/she has lived in good faith without committing any specific crime during the period from July 2009 to nine years from the time of the instant crime, the driving distance is relatively short; the Defendant’s age, motive for the crime, blood alcohol concentration (0.98%) as indicated in the lower court and the oral argument at the lower court and the party, and considering various sentencing conditions such as family relations, it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion imposed by the lower court or is too unfair.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.