A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. There are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime and reflects, the fact that the defendant scrapped the vehicle driven by the defendant, and the defendant supports the wife and two minor children.

On the other hand, there are circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant's refusal to measure drinking was punished twice by a fine, a one-time suspension of execution, a one-time suspension of execution of sentence, a defendant's imprisonment with prison labor for six months due to drinking or non-licensed driving, and the defendant was provisionally released on January 16, 201 when he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months due to drinking or non-licensed driving, and the period of parole was three years after the expiration of the parole period, thereby constituting a repeated crime of the same kind. At the time, the alcohol concentration of the defendant's blood was higher than 0.11%.

In full view of such circumstances and other circumstances as the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, and various conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and pleadings, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. As such, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. Thus, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.