2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness exists in the area unique to the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing, and the fact that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court 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, etc.). (B) The instant crime is acknowledged as follows: (a) the Defendant was revoked his/her driver’s license; (b) the Defendant was driven while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.226%; and (c) the Defendant was subject to a fine twice due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

However, the above circumstances were already launched in the oral proceedings of the lower court, and there was no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court after the pronouncement of the lower judgment, the Defendant recognized and reflects a criminal act, the Defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine, and the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, do not seem to be unfair because the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

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