2. The conclusion that the Defendant committed a crime during the period of suspension of execution and that the blood alcohol concentration is considerably high to 0.342%, thus the possibility of criticism is large.

However, the lower court determined a punishment by taking account of the Defendant’s attitude not to repeat driving distance and crime.

From November 2, 2018 to the date of the appellate trial, the Defendant received alcohol addiction treatment from an I Hospital and seems to have led to the fact at the lower court.

The determination of the original judgment cannot be respected.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Examining the sentencing factors again in this court, it cannot be deemed unreasonable that the amount of the original sentence exceeds the reasonable scope of the discretion.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of conclusion is without merit.

The dismissal under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is dismissed.