2. The following circumstances are that the Defendant again committed the instant crime under the circumstances where a summary order was issued due to the same kind of crime, which led to the instant traffic accident that the victims sustained while driving under normal conditions due to influence of drinking, and that the Defendant again committed the instant crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

Meanwhile, there are circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant reflects the crime; (b) the Defendant did not have any history of criminal punishment otherwise finalized prior to the instant crime; (c) the victim’s injury appears to have been relatively low; (d) the vehicle of the Defendant was covered by the comprehensive automobile insurance; and (e) the fact that both the victims and the victims appear to have reached a relatively clear social relationship.

Considering the above circumstances and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the family relation, occupation, age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it is difficult to deem that the sentence of the court below is too unfeasible and unfair.

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

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.