The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor, two years of suspended execution, 40 hours of order to attend a law-abiding lecture, 120 hours of community service order) of the lower court is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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 them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The crime of this case is recognized that the Defendant driven a vehicle while driving a vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.154%, and the nature of the crime is not easy, and that the Defendant has the record of being punished by a fine twice for the same kind of crime.

However, considering all of the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments of this case including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., it is difficult to deem that the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable, and thus, is unreasonable, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of and reflect against the instant crime; (b) the Defendant was a relatively short distance from drinking driving; (c) the Defendant sold a vehicle operated at the time of the instant crime; and (d) the Defendant would not drive a drinking again in the future by selling the vehicle; (b) there was no record of punishment exceeding the previous fine; and (c) there is no change in the circumstances to change the sentence of the lower

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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.