2. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant driven a motor device bicycle without a mandatory insurance without a driver’s license under the influence of alcohol content of 0.264% in blood; (b) the Defendant had a history of having been punished twice due to driving under influence of alcohol; (c) the Defendant had been punished three times due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act; and (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with labor, it is necessary to punish the Defendant strictly, as alleged by the prosecutor.

However, the defendant would not repeat such a crime, such as selling a motor device bicycle again.

The court below's punishment against the defendant on the basis of the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are shown in the records and the theory of changes in the road traffic law, is against the defendant's health, the defendant's health status is not good, the punishment for driving without the driver's license was imposed in 2000, the two punishment for driving without the driver's license was imposed in 2008 and 2011, and the three times punishment was imposed for violating the Road Traffic Act was imposed in 1999.

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.