The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (the imprisonment of eight months, one year of suspended execution, one year of community service order, 80 hours, and 40 hours of lectures to treat alcohol addiction) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a sentence against the Defendant by taking into account the following: (a) the victims were paid insurance proceeds involved in an accident; (b) the victims agreed to the victims; (c) the victims’ injury was minor; and (d) the victims did not have any kind of force during the last ten years, and the Defendant

In addition to the above sentencing conditions, even if comprehensive consideration of all the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion. There is no change in special circumstances that may be assessed differently from the sentencing conditions of the lower court up to the trial. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is unfair because it is too uneasible

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 on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.