2. The crime of this case is that the defendant driving a vehicle 1 km with a alcohol concentration of 0.130% while under the influence of alcohol while blood and causing any danger to traffic. In light of the degree of driving, the driving distance, etc., the crime of this case is not easy, and even if the defendant was punished twice a fine for the same kind of crime, the crime of this case is committed again. The current Road Traffic Act stipulates that the person who violated the prohibition of driving under the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol twice or more shall be punished more strictly when driving under the influence of alcohol, as in this case, for the purpose of preventing the driving under the influence of alcohol that threatens the safety of traffic on the road and enhancing the awareness of it.

However, in full view of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, including the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the defendant's act of sex, family environment, motive and background of the crime, means and result of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, family environment, motive and consequence of the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unjustifiable and unfair, considering the following factors: (a) there is a circumstance that may be taken into account as to the circumstances that led to the crime of this case, knowing that the state of drinking was resolved after drinking, and that the state of drinking was resolved after drinking; (b) there was no additional traffic accident due to the crime of this case; and (c) there was no other criminal force except

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.