2. Although the Defendant had had a record of punishment for drunk driving, the fact that the Defendant again avoided the crime of drinking driving of the instant vehicle, and that he escaped approximately about 10 km from the drinking control by the police officer, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant does not repeat the crime by reflecting his mistake, that he was trying to return home after taking the waters after drinking at the time, and that he did not have any criminal power exceeding the fine, is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed as being too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.