2. The following facts are acknowledged: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects his mistake; (b) the Defendant was the first offender who had no record of criminal punishment previously committed; (c) the Defendant had a family member to support the Defendant, such as pregnant wife and children; and (d) the Defendant did not seem to have any economic circumstance to raise the living cost of his family members as public interest service personnel.

However, the crime of this case is under the influence of 0.161% alcohol level in blood, and the case is not less and less in light of the blood alcohol level, etc., the crime of this case was committed by the defendant, which caused physical damage by taking a taxi and a low-income vehicle from the defendant's driver's vehicle due to the crime of this case, and the crime of drinking driving requires strict punishment for the crime of threatening another person's life and body as well as the crime of drinking driving. The revised Road Traffic Act strengthens the punishment for the crime of drinking, and comprehensively takes into account the following circumstances, such as the defendant's age, environment, circumstances leading to the crime of this case, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too too unreasonable.

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.