도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s sentence (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment and forty hours of lectures to comply with law) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. The judgment of the defendant has committed a crime of drinking again even though he had been before drinking twice during the last three years, and therefore, the defendant needs to be punished strictly.
However, the fact that the defendant repents his mistake, and the defendant again does not stop from committing the crime of drinking driving.
In full view of the following facts: (a) there is no criminal record exceeding a fine, and there is no criminal record other than the above two-time criminal records, and (b) the lower court ordered the Defendant to engage in the robbery of compliance with the law together with a suspended sentence of imprisonment; and (c) other various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unfair, and thus, the prosecutor’s assertion
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.