The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment for one year, a 120-hour community service and a 40-hour compliance driving instruction) is too uneasible.

2. The fact that the Defendant’s mistake is divided in depth, and that the Defendant driven a relatively long distance after driving a substitute driving to the destination is considered favorable to the Defendant.

However, the Defendant had been punished three times prior to the instant crime, and among which, on February 16, 201, the Seoul Southern District Court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on the grounds of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Road Traffic (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment

In full view of the above circumstances and other conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive for committing a crime, means and consequence of a crime, etc., the court below’s decision to suspend the execution of imprisonment with prison labor against the Defendant for a period of two years, which the court below sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant, is deemed to be somewhat unreasonable and unfair. Accordingly, the Prosecutor’s allegation

3. In conclusion, 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.

【Grounds for the Judgment of the Supreme Court which has been written] The criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to each corresponding part of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting a crime (the point of sound driving), subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act;