2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness exists in the area unique to the first deliberation regarding sentencing, and the fact that the court of appeal ex post facto character of the appellate trial, etc., if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first deliberation sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). (B) The instant crime is deemed to have been destroyed by another person without any particular reason while under the influence of alcohol, and the nature of the offense is not somewhat weak, and the Defendant has been punished by a fine several times under the influence of alcohol.

However, the above circumstances were already launched in the oral proceedings of the lower court; there was no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court after the pronouncement of the lower judgment; the Defendant recognized the error of the lower court; the damage was recovered; the Defendant agreed with the victim; the Defendant appears to have been making efforts to treat the symptoms caused by alcohol; and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, means and consequence of the crime; and the various sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, do not seem to be unfair because the sentence of the lower court is too uneasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.