The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) considering the fact that the Defendant, who has been punished twice due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the drinking driving, such as this case, committed the instant crime again and the risk of repeating the crime is considerable; and (b) there is a social consensus on the necessity of the strict punishment for drinking driving, the lower court’s punishment (one year and four months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 40 hours of order to attend a course) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. We examine the determination of the grounds for appeal, and the above circumstances alleged by the prosecutor are deemed to have been sufficiently considered in the lower court’s determination of the punishment. Moreover, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s mistake in the course of committing the instant crime; (c) the blood alcohol concentration was relatively low; and (d) the Defendant did not incur physical personal injury due to the instant crime, the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too low.

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