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

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court, and the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the scope of reasonable discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). (B) The degree of injury to the victims of the instant crime is relatively minor, and the fact that the victims agreed with the victims is favorable to the Defendant.

However, at the time of the instant crime, the alcohol value of the Defendant was in a state of 0.196%, and the distance that the Defendant intended to operate is still short (the Defendant was planned to operate from the Don-dong to the third class), and was punished at least ten times for the same kind of crime, and the short-term punishment has already been imposed four times, and the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the period of repeated offense due to drinking and non-licenseless driving.

In full view of the above factors of sentencing, there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing at the trial, and in full view of all the factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or unreasonable.

(c)

The argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is all rejected.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.