The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (a year and six months of imprisonment, a suspended sentence of three years, a observation of protection, and an order to attend a law enforcement lecture for 40 hours) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the first instance sentencing determination (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). In most cases, the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor as an unfavorable factor in sentencing in the trial at the trial of the lower court were revealed in the hearing of the lower court, and there is no other unfavorable changes in circumstances relating to the matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment was made.

The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, such as the defendant's injury to three victims while driving without a license under the influence of alcohol, and at the same time, destroyed the damaged vehicle and escaped as it is, and the crime is bad in nature, and the defendant has been punished once by driving without a license.

On the other hand, the defendant seems to reflect his mistake and the victims suffered injury.