2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is unreasonable by comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, including the following: (a) the Defendant’s favorable circumstances; (b) the Defendant used the instant case’s health care room; (c) the Defendant recognized his/her mistake; and (d) the distance of driving without a license is about 200 meters; (d) the Defendant used the instant unlicensed driving again during the suspension period due to drinking and driving without license; and (e) one month after the judgment of the suspended sentence became final and conclusive; and (e) the Defendant used the instantless driving at the time when the judgment of the suspended sentence became final and conclusive; (e) the sentence imposed by the lower court falls under the maximum penalty if the Defendant selects a fine under statutory penalty; (c) the Defendant’s age, character, environment, family relationship and social bond; and (d) the motive, background, means, and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime.

Therefore, 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.