The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a fine of five million won) imposed by the lower court is too unfilled and unreasonable.

2. Circumstances can be taken into account such as the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects his mistake, that there was no history of punishment exceeding the fine, and that the same criminal record was eight years prior to the same offense.

However, even though the defendant had been punished for the same crime, he is driving a considerable distance of distance while under the influence of alcohol.

In light of the investigation record, the defendant's defense counsel's assertion that the blood alcohol level was 0.098% high, and the defendant's defense counsel asserted that the defendant's defense counsel is "nurging under the condition that the drinking alcohol was lower than the previous drinking alcohol level," and that the defendant's defense counsel reported himself after contact with the defendant. However, according to the investigation records of the defendant's circumstantial statement prepared immediately after drinking alcohol driving in this case, the "11th day of the investigation records of the investigation report of the defendant's circumstantial statement of the drinking driver" is stated as "nurgical motive" as "nurging women's child-friendliness, drinking alcohol, drinking alcohol type, and drinking alcohol volume: Mara 1 disease", and the police defendant stated as "I may not have reported." At the time of investigation, it is difficult to accept the above defense counsel's argument as it is, due to social consensus about the risk and seriousness of drinking alcohol driving in recent years, the defendant's age, character and behavior, circumstances, etc., and the sentencing of the punishment of the maximum sentencing.

The prosecutor's argument is with merit.

3. Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[The reasons for multiple judgments].