도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for one year, two years of probation, 160 hours of community service order, and 40 hours of a compliance driving lecture) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court, and in full view of the factors revealed in the instant argument, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfluent and so it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.