All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. On the summary of the reasons for appeal, the defendant asserts that the defendant is too unfasible to the punishment sentenced by the court below (ten months of imprisonment), and that the prosecutor is too unfased and unfair.

2. The Defendant had already been subject to criminal punishment twice due to drinking, driving without a license, and juvenile protective disposition twice, and committed a crime several times within the next short term even though he/she had been subject to punishment twice due to violent crimes, and the Defendant committed a crime several times in the second short term despite the fact that he/she had been subject to punishment twice due to violent crimes, and repeated driving of drinking and without a license even after the occurrence of a traffic accident by causing a traffic accident, and the degree of criticism is large in that alcohol concentration in blood at the time of each crime is relatively high, and that the degree of assault against the victim is not easy.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions on the records, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, occupation, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed appropriate, and it is not deemed unfair because it is too heavy or unfeasible. It is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or unreasonable. It is not recognized that the punishment imposed by the defendant is appropriate in full view of the following: (a) the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant; (b) the defendant disposes of the motor vehicle used for the crime; (c) the defendant has no criminal record other than the fine; and (d) the defendant and the victim took the divorce procedure at the time of the crime of this case; (b) the victim

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act: Provided, That the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment is the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (toxicated Driving) at the Seog District Court Branch of the Daegu District Court on February 2, 2017, and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (toxicated Driving) at the same court on February 8, 2017, and is currently pending trial.