Judgment

The crime of this case is deemed to have driven a car while under the influence of alcohol by the defendant, and the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant are recognized, such as the fact that the responsibility for the crime is heavy in light of the circumstances and contents of the crime, and that the defendant has a variety of records of the same crime.

However, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in our Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct supervision, where the first instance court has no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The unfavorable circumstances against the above recognized defendant do not fall under any special change of circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence of the lower court, and do not fall under any other special circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence of the lower court, and there is no history that the defendant has been subject to criminal punishment exceeding the fine up to the present time, and in our Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct supervision, it does not seem unfair for the lower court to impose the sentence on the defendant too much, considering the circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing specified in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, and environment.

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