2. The fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake and did not repeat again, and that the Defendant was relatively short of the distance driven at the time of the instant case and did not lead to a traffic accident, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

However, drinking driving is a serious criminal who could cause unexpected behaviors as well as the life and home of others by raising the possibility of traffic accidents. The defendant, prior to the crime of this case, was punished four times, and the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years and six months in 2017 due to drinking driving, etc., but he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years in 2 years and six months in 2017, and the defendant's blood alcohol concentration at the time of this case is considerably high to 0.157% in 0.157%, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

The lower court appears to have determined a punishment within a reasonable scope of discretion by fully taking into account the aforementioned various circumstances favorable to or unfavorable to the Defendant, and there is no special circumstance to change the sentencing after the lower judgment.

In addition, examining the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and criminal records, it is not deemed that the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

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 since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.