2. From the investigation stage, the Defendant recognized the instant crime from the investigation stage to not repeat the crime, and recognized that the victims do not want criminal punishment by the Defendant, and that the victims do not want criminal punishment by the victims, and that the degree of injury suffered by the victims is relatively minor, and that the Defendant is a disabled person of the third degree with a delay disability and his wife is a disabled person of the second degree with a delay disability.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant while driving under the influence of alcohol and causing a traffic accident to inflict an injury on the victims that requires approximately two weeks medical treatment, and the nature of the crime was not less severe, and the defendant was punished twice due to the crime of driving under the influence of alcohol, and committed again the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he was committed even though he was subject to a repeated crime due to the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, since alcohol concentration in blood is 0.160%, the degree of driving is high, and the defendant's economic situation, age, sex, environment, circumstances, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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