2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, interferes with another person’s business by force, and intending to enter the bottom of a motor vehicle in operation, is likely to interfere with traffic on the ground by avoiding disturbance, and the nature of the instant crime is not good in light of the form and method of the crime, the potential danger, etc.

The defendant has been sentenced to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, and the execution of punishment for general goods has been completed, and even if the period of repeated crime has been completed, there is a high possibility of criticism as the crime of this case, and there is a strong penalty for the crime.

However, the Defendant led to confession of the crime of this case and is in profoundly against it.

After the crime of this case, active efforts were made for the opening of the hospital, such as hospitalization in the hospital and receiving treatment for the proof of alcohol.

In addition, for the first time, the victim D submitted a written application for non-criminal punishment against the defendant.

In addition, considering the following circumstances comprehensively, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment, which was imposed on the Defendant as a fine, does not seem to be unfair as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of its discretion.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

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