The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, observation of protection, 40 hours of an order to attend lectures for alcohol treatment, 24 hours of an order to attend lectures for compliance driving) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The conclusion that the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime despite the fact that he/she had been punished several times for the same crime is disadvantageous.

However, the defendant does not commit a second offense because he or she repents his or her mistake and reflects his or her mistake.

In light of the favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving the instant drinking, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving the instant drinking did not exceed 0.097%, and the Defendant’s health is not good, and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, background and result of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 346(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.