The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (6 million won in penalty) declared by the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. The Defendant’s vehicle driving in the state of 0.321% alcohol concentration in blood, and the crime of this case is likely to lead to an accident in which the Defendant was parked and discovered in the process of handling the vehicle and may lead to an accident in which the Defendant was found to a larger degree of criticism.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed a crime while committing a crime; (b) the Defendant did not have any history of being punished as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act; (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal record in addition to fines; (d) the driving distance is shorter than five meters; and (e) other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, such as the background of the crime; (e) the Defendant’s age; and (e) sexual conduct, the sentence of the lower court is

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 148-2(2)1 and Article 44 of the Road Traffic Act’s “Article 148-2(2)1 and Article 44 of the Road Traffic Act” in the application of the law of the court below is obvious that it is a clerical error of Article 148-2(2)1 and Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and it is corrected ex officio).