A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. As to the wrongful assertion of judgment and the Defendant’s sentencing, the circumstances are disadvantageous to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant had a history of having been punished several times due to drinking or unlicensed driving; and (b) the occurrence of an accident causing the vehicle parked while driving under the influence of alcohol; and (c) the risk of driving under the influence of alcohol has been realized.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and reflects it, and that the driving distance is not about 20 meters is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the Defendant’s age, sex, health conditions, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the degree of alcohol content in the blood, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is not deemed to be excessively light or heavier than that of the Defendant’s reasonable discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. If so, the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.