2. The judgment on the grounds of appeal of this case is recognized as a favorable circumstance where the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, and there is no history of punishment heavier than a fine, and the vehicle of this case is covered by a comprehensive insurance, and the defendant purchased the vehicle of this case by agreement with the victim and the victim did not want the punishment of the defendant, and the defendant disposed of the vehicle of this case as the defendant did not want the punishment of the defendant, and the defendant's family and work union fees were prevented from repeating recidivism.

However, the crime of this case committed by the defendant while driving under the influence of alcohol level 0.195% without taking necessary measures such as aiding and abetting the victim after causing a traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol level 0.195%. The nature and circumstances of the crime are very good. The defendant committed the crime of this case including the same crime even though he had been punished three times as a fine for the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and even though he had the record of punishment for the violation of the Road Traffic Act, the defendant repeatedly committed the crime of this case including the same crime. In full view of the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances leading the defendant to the crime of this case, means and consequence, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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