Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal argues that the defendant's punishment (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of an order to attend a compliance driving course) declared by the court below is too unreasonable, and that the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The judgment of the Defendant reflects the Defendant’s wrong perception of the instant crime and reflects the Defendant’s depth, and does not repeat the instant crime; there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the suspended sentence; the blood alcohol concentration of the instant case is relatively higher than 0.070%; the driving distance is not less than 800 meters; and the Defendant is the most likely to support his family.

On the other hand, even before committing the instant crime, the Defendant had been punished several times including a suspended sentence due to drinking driving and driving without a license, and the Defendant committed the instant crime even during the current suspended execution period, which is the same as the instant crime, and the instant crime is not suitable for committing a crime due to the reduction of driving without a license, and is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, including the above poor circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, etc., the lower court’s punishment appears to be appropriate. Therefore, the above assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor is without merit

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit. It is so decided