2. The fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being a person during the suspension of the execution of judgment, that the Defendant’s blood alcohol content is very high to 0.202%, that the instant traffic accident occurred due to the instant drinking driving, and that the Defendant had a record of punishment for drinking driving around 2011 is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the following conditions are favorable.

Defendant said that he would not commit the instant crime against himself and will not repeat the crime.

Crimes committed during the period of probation are different from those of the instant crime.

D. The damages caused by the instant traffic accident are relatively minor even if they are involved.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, and various sentencing conditions shown in the instant records and pleadings, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

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.