2. Although the judgment defendant had a record of being punished as a drunk driving, the fact that the defendant drives a drunk driving is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, considering the following as a whole: (a) the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects; (b) the Defendant did not have any specific penal power other than the punishment of a fine imposed once due to drinking driving in 2007; (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct; (d) motive of the crime; (e) blood alcohol concentration level; (e) driving distance; and (e) circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion by taking into account all the factors of sentencing specified in the present pleadings; and (e) there are no special changes in circumstances that could change the sentencing of the lower court, and thus, it cannot be deemed unfair on the grounds that the lower court’s

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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.