The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 40 hours of order to attend a course) is too unhued and unreasonable.

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.

(see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the aforementioned sentence in consideration of various sentencing conditions, including the following: (a) the nature of the crime is inferior; (b) the failure to take advantage of it from the victims; (c) the Defendant recognized his/her mistake; and (d) the Defendant re-influences against himself/herself; and (b) the Defendant does not drive under the influence of alcohol again; and (c) there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too unfasible.

The prosecutor's 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.

[However, according to Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, "(s)" is added to the column of concurrent crimes among the application of the law of the court below ex officio in accordance with the application of the law of the court below.