The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (6 million won in penalty) declared by the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. It is recognized that the judgment blood alcohol concentration is very high by 0.300%, and that it causes an accident that causes physical damage by shocking a vehicle parked while driving under drinking.

However, the Defendant’s mistake is divided, there is no history of punishment heavier than a fine, and there is no history of punishment for the same crime. The distance of drinking driving is relatively short of about 50 meters, taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the summary of the evidence in the judgment of the court below was added by mistake to the 2nd “traffic accident report (report on investigation into actual condition), actual condition investigation report, and internal investigation report (report on blood collection approval)” and “1. The statement report on the situation of the driver at the main place” was made in the column for the application of the relevant statute on the grounds that it is apparent that each error was omitted in the “Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Provisional Payment Order was deleted and added ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on the Criminal Procedure.”