2. The following facts are the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant did not know himself during the period of suspension of execution for the same kind of crime; (b) the Defendant was punished for driving under the influence of alcohol; and (c) the Defendant appears to have been under the influence of alcohol due to blood alcohol content from 0.142% at the time of driving.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant is recognized as all of his crime and is against the defendant, that there are some circumstances to consider the circumstances of the crime, such as the defendant's drinking alcohol due to the entrance of the military, that the defendant does not cause an accident due to drunk driving, and that the defendant shows his intention not to repeat the crime, such as scrapping of the vehicle of this case which he driven after the accident in this case, etc., are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the Defendant, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s allegation above is without merit.

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