2. In light of the fact that the Defendant, even though having been subject to punishment twice due to drinking, has caused a traffic accident while driving a motor vehicle while driving the motor vehicle at the altitude of 0.205% in alcohol level during his/her blood, and that many victims have suffered injury, the Defendant needs to be subject to punishment corresponding thereto.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions on the records, including the defendant's age, sex, environment, occupation, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unfeasible and it is not deemed unfair, in light of the following: (a) the defendant was committed in the course of committing the crime; (b) the degree of injury suffered by the victims is not serious; (c) the vehicle is covered by the automobile comprehensive insurance; and (d) the defendant has no criminal history for the last five years; and (c)

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit. Thus, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That it is obvious that the omission of “1. Selection of punishment: Imprisonment with labor,” among the application of the law of the original judgment, is a clerical error, and thus, it is corrected ex officio as it is corrected.)