교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s sentence (three years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and forty hours of attending a compliance driving for ten months) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. In light of the fact that the Defendant, even before three times of drinking driving, again causes a traffic accident while driving a drinking again, the need for strict punishment against the Defendant is high.
However, the defendant is able to repent his mistake and will not drive drinking again.
In light of the following: (a) the above three-time criminal records are deemed to have been sentenced to a fine and before 2005; (b) the Defendant has no other criminal records other than the above three-time criminal records; (c) the Defendant was subscribed to a motor vehicle comprehensive insurance; (d) the Defendant’s driving vehicle is subject to protection and observation along with the suspension of the execution of imprisonment; and (e) other various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) other various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too una
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.