2. Although there are unfavorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s blood alcohol content exceeds 0.134% at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant again committed each of the instant crimes despite the fact that he had been punished several times due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act, etc. However, the degree of injury suffered by the victims due to the instant traffic accident is not more severe, the Defendant agreed with the victims, the Defendant has no capacity to suspend qualifications or more, the Defendant has no capacity to punish the Defendant, the Defendant reflects his mistake, and all other sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant’s assertion 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.

[However, the application of the law in the judgment below is clearly omitted from the "Article 148 and Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of failure to take measures after destruction and damage)" in the "application of the law" of the judgment below, and it is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure by adding it to the "Article 268 of the Criminal Act (the point of failure to take measures after destruction and damage of the road traffic Act)"