All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The lower court dismissed the prosecution against the Defendant regarding the insult of the facts charged in the instant case, and convicted the Defendant of the remainder of the facts charged.

Since the dismissal part of a public prosecutor’s appeal against the guilty part of the judgment of the court below for the reason that the sentencing was unfair, which was not appealed by the prosecutor, is separate and finalized depending on the expiration of the period of appeal, the judgment of the court below is to be made only for the guilty part

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

3. In light of the fact that the Defendant had been punished four times due to driving of alcohol or refusing to take measurements of alcohol (one-year punishment, one-time suspension of execution, one-time suspension of execution, and two-time imprisonment), and that the Defendant was under investigation on August 14, 2016 due to his refusal to take measurements of drinking alcohol, but without being aware of it, and caused a traffic accident and causing the injury to the victim. At the time, the Defendant’s blood concentration level was considerably higher than 0.199%, and the Defendant committed six times or more of punishment (five times of punishment, five times of punishment, and one-time punishment) with the records of violation of the Punishment of Property Damage or Violences, etc. Act (one-time joint damage). In light of the fact that the Defendant committed another property damage, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant’s imprisonment.

However, there are extenuating circumstances such as the fact that the defendant fully recognized the crime, the injury of the victim is not much serious, the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim of the traffic accident, and the fact that the defendant has compensated for the damage.

In full view of such circumstances and other circumstances as the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the lower court should have determined the sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and arguments.