2. The Defendant had been punished five times due to drinking or non-licensed driving (four times a punishment, one time a suspended sentence). In particular, even though the Defendant was sentenced to two years of a suspended sentence on July 15, 2016 due to driving under the influence of alcohol and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 15, 2016, the Defendant committed the instant crime because one year has not passed from the date, etc., which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the circumstances that can be considered, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected against the Defendant, the distance of the Defendant’s driving at the time was shorter than approximately 100 meters, that is, the driving of a simple license without permission, and that all the previous records of the same kind before the suspension of the execution were at intervals of time prior to 2008, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for the commission of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable

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.