All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The defendant asserts that the defendant's punishment of the court below (six months of imprisonment with prison labor) is too unfasible, and the prosecutor is too unfased and unfair.

2. The favorable circumstance is that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects it.

On the other hand, the defendant committed the crime of refusing to measure drinking in this case even though he had been punished five times due to drinking driving (including the previous conviction of the first suspension of the execution) and had a lot of criminal records of the second and the second suspension of the execution of drinking.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the records, such as the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, including the circumstances after the crime, and the first instance court where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the court of first instance, and where the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015), etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed appropriate, and it is not deemed unfair because the sentence imposed by the defendant is too heavy or unab

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.