2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness exists in the area unique to the first deliberation regarding the determination of sentencing, and the fact that the court of first instance ex post facto character of the appellate trial, etc., if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance trial, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

However, the above circumstances were already launched during the oral argument of the court below, and there was no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the decision of the court below was made, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and was divided in depth, the defendant has no particular power except for the punishment of a fine three times due to drinking driving, supporting his family members, and the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, circumstance, means and consequence of the crime, as well as all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered as being too unjustifiable and thus, it cannot be deemed unfair.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion 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.