도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The lower court’s sentence (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, 80 hours of community service, and 40 hours of compliance driving) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.
2. In the judgment, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration reached 0.264% at the time of the crime of this case, and the risk of driving and driving without a license has been realized and traffic accidents have occurred. The defendant had already been sentenced to three times of drinking and a fine for negligence without a license on two occasions, and in particular, the defendant was sentenced to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (non-licenseless Driving) on May 17, 2017 while driving a motor vehicle while the driver's license was revoked due to drinking, and was sentenced to a fine on the part of the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (non-licenseless Driving) and again committed the crime of this case on three days only
On the other hand, however, the distance of the defendant's driving is not relatively long, and the accident that occurred due to this is not significant. The defendant still has no record of being sentenced to a suspended sentence or higher due to drinking driving or driving without a license, and the defendant shows his attitude to recognize and reflect all his mistake, and the defendant's wife desires to dismiss the defendant's wife, etc. In addition, taking into account all the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, such as family relation, age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime was committed, changes in circumstances after the judgment of the court below, etc., it cannot be said that the sentence of the court below appears to be reasonable and appropriate and unfair.
Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That it is evident that the part of the judgment below's "application of statutes" was omitted with respect to reduction of amount, so the part of "1. Selection of punishment" ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure is next to "1."