교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the sentence of two years of suspended execution in the month of imprisonment for eight months, community service 40 hours, and compliance driving lectures) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. The fact that the Defendant, while driving a cargo vehicle while driving the vehicle at a high level of 0.135% alcohol in blood, caused a traffic accident, and as a result, several victims suffered an injury, and the degree of criticism is serious in that some victims suffered an injury.
However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant committed a crime; (b) the victims are not subject to the punishment of the Defendant by agreement with the victims; (c) the automobile is covered by the comprehensive automobile insurance; (d) the Defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime; and (e) other conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, occupation, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and is not recognized as unfair.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That in the application of the law of the court below, “the proviso of Articles 37(1)2, 38(2), 50, and 42 of the Criminal Act” is a clerical error in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 38(2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, and thus, it is obvious that the same is a clerical error in the provisions of Article 37(1)2, Article 38(2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act).