A. The Defendant (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is recognized that the Defendant had a record of being punished several times for the same crime (nine times for drinking driving and ten times for driving without a license) and, in particular, the Defendant had a record of serving several times of punishment due to drinking driving, etc., and the Defendant committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated offense due to drinking driving and driving without a license.

B. However, the defendant confessions the crime of this case and reflects it, and the alcohol content of the defendant is high.

In full view of the fact that it is difficult to see, that there is a defendant’s economic situation, that there is a family member to support, and other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant’s age, background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be too weak or unreasonable.

(c)

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, since all appeals filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit, they are all dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.