All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The defendant asserts that, concerning the summary of the grounds for appeal (in both cases, one year and four years of suspended execution, etc.) sentenced by the court below, the defendant is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court held that the Defendant committed the instant crime and the instant crime favorable to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant’s confession during the commission of all the instant crime; (b) the victim of the instant traffic accident does not seem to have been seriously injured due to the instant traffic accident; (c) the Defendant’s driving vehicle can be deemed to have been admitted to the comprehensive M&C program; (d) the Defendant’s vehicle is likely to have been damaged to a certain extent; (b) the victims are not wanting to be punished against the Defendant; (c) the Defendant did not want to have any criminal punishment; (d) the Defendant supported two children; and (e) the Defendant has no history of criminal punishment; and (e) the instant crime continues

The above punishment was imposed by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the second accident was caused by the shocking three victims of the crosswalks according to the new code, and the crime is not highly good; and (b) the blood alcohol concentration level is considerably high; and (c) the defendant was sentenced to the above punishment by taking into account the various sentencing conditions of the defendant as shown in the pleading.

The judgment below

There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that can be considered newly after the sentence.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family situation, circumstances surrounding the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the sentencing of the lower court is too heavy or unhued.

A defendant and a prosecutor;