All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, where a person who has violated the prohibition clause of drinking driving at least twice again for the purpose of preventing the drinking without a license, which threatens the safety of road traffic, and overcoming the awareness of the influence of drinking again for the purpose of preventing the drinking without a license, even though he had been already punished seven times due to the previous drinking driving and driving without a license, and the current Road Traffic Act provides that a person who has violated the prohibition clause of drinking driving shall be punished more strictly in the event of drinking again.

On the other hand, the circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the defendant was committed with respect to each of the crimes in this case; (b) the driving distance is not relatively long; (c) there is no penalty power exceeding the fine; and (d) there is a family member to support.

In light of the above circumstances, if all circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, are taken into consideration, the sentence of the lower court is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s and the prosecutor’s assertion are too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, all of the arguments by the Defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

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