2. The judgment on the grounds for appeal is a critical crime that causes danger to the life and body of himself/herself and others, and the revised Road Traffic Act strengthens criminal punishment by raising the statutory penalty against the defendant, despite the fact that the defendant had been punished three times due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and that he/she drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a high blood alcohol concentration of 0.442%, and that drinking is a serious crime that causes danger to the life and body of himself/herself and others.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the records of punishment for the same crime for the last five years are limited to once, there is no punishment exceeding the fine for the last 30 years, and the defendant's oral condition at the time of drinking control, etc., the defendant's blood alcohol concentration level is likely to have been measured relatively higher than the defendant's blood alcohol level at the time of this case due to the defendant's climatic light evidence, which is the defendant's illness at the time of drinking control, and other various circumstances such as the defendant's age, character, character, family environment, background of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court, it cannot be deemed that the punishment imposed by the court below is too inappropriate.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.