The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the community service order 40 hours, the order to attend a law enforcement lecture 40 hours) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. On July 22, 2016, the Defendant: (a) caused a traffic accident on July 22, 2016, causing two victims to be injured (the first-class crime of this case); (b) committed a second-class crime of driving under influence on August 6, 2016, which did not continue to exist after the said crime (the second-class crime of this case); (c) did not receive suspicion from the victims; and (d) the drinking level at the time of each of the instant crimes of driving under influence of alcohol of this case is also high.

The criminal liability of the defendant is not easy.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the record, including the fact that the Defendant recognized the facts charged, the fact that there was no previous conviction other than a single type of fine, the degree of injury of the victims is relatively minor, and the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation, environment, circumstances leading to the commission of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is unfeasible and unreasonable.

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That in the application of the judgment of the court below, Article 3(1), proviso of Article 3(2)2 and proviso of Article 3(8) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, “Article 3(1) and proviso of Article 3(2)8 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents,” is obvious that it is a clerical error under Article 3(1) and proviso of Article 3(2) proviso of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of