All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant asserts that the defendant's punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable, while the prosecutor filed each appeal by asserting that it is too unfasible and unfair (the prosecutor stated that the defendant must be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year). 2. The fact that the defendant has no past history of criminal punishment of imprisonment with prison labor or heavier is an element for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

However, even though the defendant is under suspension of execution due to drinking driving, he/she has committed another crime of this case again, and has been subject to criminal punishment several times due to driving without a license for drinking.

In addition, even after the Defendant was under control by driving without a license in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents on November 10, 2015 (the Defendant was subject to a summary order of a fine on March 15, 2016), it is highly likely to repeat a crime since he/she was under control by driving without a license in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

In addition to the above circumstances, considering the sentencing conditions in this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, and environment, the punishment determined by the court below against the Defendant is not deemed unfair because it is too heavy or too heavy within the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of sentencing is without merit.

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