도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of one year, two years of suspended execution, 120 hours of community service, 40 hours of compliance instruction, 40 hours of alcohol treatment, 40 hours of alcohol treatment) on the summary of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.
2. In comparison with the judgment of the court below, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing at the court below, and the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too uneasible and unreasonable.
Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.
3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.
[Judgment of the court below, in the application of the law of the court below, "the choice of each sentence" is a clerical error in the imprisonment with prison labor and the violation of the Road Traffic Act with respect to the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and Article 37 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act" of the aggravated concurrent crimes is a clerical error in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 38 (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the court below's decision to punish the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act by its ex officio rectification in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.