The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The main reason of appeal is that the sentence imposed on the defendant (two years of suspended execution in August, community service order 120 hours, and 40 hours of attending order) by the court below is too uneased and unreasonable.

Judgment

In the past, it is recognized that the defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had been punished several times due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), and that he did not agree with the victim E and I until the trial of the case is held.

However, the degree of injury suffered by the victims is relatively relatively less severe, and since the vehicle driven by the defendant is covered by the comprehensive insurance, the victims' recovery from damage is guaranteed, and the defendant agreed in the original judgment only with G of the victims.

In addition, there is no record of punishment exceeding fine.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of the instant case, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, etc., the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair because it is too uneasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.