2. The crime of this case is deemed to be under the influence of alcohol, sound, and obstruct the victim's business for about 40 minutes, and the quality of the crime is inferior in light of the law and content of the crime. The defendant has been punished five times due to the same crime, and the defendant committed the crime of this case during the suspension period of the execution of imprisonment for the same kind of crime. However, the court below seems to have determined the punishment in consideration of all the above sentencing reasons.

In full view of these circumstances, the Defendant led to the confession of and in depth against the crime, the fact that the Defendant appears to have committed the crime of this case in a contingent manner under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant’s treatment of alcohol addiction after the crime of this case, and the Defendant committed a second offense, and the Defendant’s consent to the punishment of the Defendant, and the Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, as well as various sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

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.