2. The judgment has a record of being punished twice for the same crime, and in particular, even after the issuance of a summary order of a fine of KRW 4 million on February 8, 2013 due to drinking driving on February 8, 2013, the nature of the crime of this case is very poor in that it repeatedly repeats the crime of this case within three months.

However, the above previous convictions were all punished by a fine, and there is no criminal power except for the above two times of punishment, and the extent of damage caused by the accident of this case is not significant, the victims are not subject to the punishment of the defendant, the victims are not subject to the compensation for damage and the smooth agreement, the vehicle after the accident of this case is sold to the company where the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor, and the defendant seems to have to retire from the company where the defendant was present when he was sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor. The sentence of the court below against the defendant seems to have been determined in full consideration of the various circumstances mentioned above, and there is no change of circumstances that could vary from the court below's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., and all other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing and the records of the argument of this case, the prosecutor's assertion is not acceptable since the defendant's excessive punishment imposed by the court below is unjustifiable.

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.