2. The Defendant’s crime of this case was committed under the influence of alcohol level 0.215% and was committed by five victims in total while driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol level 0.215%. In light of the content of the crime and the degree of damage, etc., the quality of the crime is not good in light of the content of the crime and the degree of damage, the victim did not reach agreement with the victims, and there was a history of punishment for the same kind of crime in the past. However, the Defendant’s liability for the crime is relatively minor; the degree of injury suffered by the victims of the traffic accident is relatively minor; the Defendant’s taxi was admitted to the taxi mutual aid association; there was no history of punishment more severe than the past; the same type of crime was punished in 200 and 201; the Defendant’s age, character, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all other circumstances that meet the conditions of sentencing after the crime, and thus, the prosecutor’s allegation that the lower court is unreasonable and unreasonable.

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.