2. In light of the fact that the judgment defendant had a history of punishment several times due to the same kind of drinking driving, but repeats the crime of this case, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly.

However, considering the following: (a) the Defendant made a confession up to the time of the trial; and (b) the Defendant would not repeat the same mistake while his depth is divided; (c) the driving distance is short and the accident did not occur; and (d) all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the motive and background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s career, and the environment, etc., the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.