The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of suspended sentence (the suspended sentence: the fine of KRW 300,000) sentenced by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment was based on the records that the defendant was punished as a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, but there is no past and previous punishment, and the distance of drinking driving is very short. The crime of this case is likely to interfere with the passage of other vehicles after the defendant was placed in the place where the substitute driver was placed in the house parking lot, and the defendant's vehicle of the person who was placed at the time of trial related to the fee and the fee, etc. is likely to interfere with the passage of other vehicles. In full view of various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below is too uncompared and unreasonable. Thus, the prosecutor's argument above is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(2) Of the lower judgment, Article 148-2(2)2 of the Road Traffic Act stated “Article 148-2(2)2 of the Road Traffic Act” as “Article 148-2(2)3 of the Road Traffic Act” refers to a clerical error in the “Article 148-2(2)3 of the Road Traffic Act. Therefore, ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article