2. Determination is recognized that the Defendant had been already punished on four occasions (one time in 2005, one time in 2009, and one time in 2010) due to drinking driving, and two times (2006, and one year in 201) due to driving without a license, despite the fact that the Defendant had already been punished.

However, in full view of all the factors of sentencing, including the Defendant’s personality and conduct, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court is conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is thus unfair since the lower court’s punishment is conducted within the extent of discretion, as it is too unreasonable, because it is too unreasonable for the lower court’s punishment to be imposed on the Defendant, because there is no previous conviction beyond the fine, and there is no history of punishment for the same offense for five years after the same punishment, there is no dependent on the Defendant, and there is no special circumstance or circumstance that may be newly taken into account in the trial.

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

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.