2. The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for six months on March 18, 2016 for a drunk driving and was under suspension of the execution of the sentence, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the facts of the offense; (b) the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant; (c) the occurrence of a traffic accident; (d) the Defendant’s non-licensed driving of the instant case is not discovered; (c) the Defendant disposed of the vehicle after each of the instant crimes; and (d) the Defendant did not have any record of having been punished for the larceny and non-licensed driving; (d) the Defendant raises two minor children who are neglected to be divorced after the divorce; and (e) the Defendant’s sentence of imprisonment is somewhat harsh for the invalidation of the existing suspended sentence by sentence to the Defendant; and (e) other various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, motive of the offense; and (e) the circumstances before and after the offense, which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the records and arguments of the instant case

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.