2. The judgment of the court below is acknowledged that the defendant recognized the facts charged in this case, and is against the depth of mistake. On the other hand, drinking driving needs to be strict when considering the social danger and harm of the crime threatening the life and body of himself/herself and others. The depositee whose blood alcohol level at the time of the crime in this case was not lower than 0.085%, the defendant was sentenced to a fine at around 2003, around 2010, and around 3 times, around 2011 due to the same drinking driving and non-licensed driving. The defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to the same kind of crime in 2011, and in particular, around 2016, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the same drinking driving and non-licensed driving, etc., and the criminal act in this case was committed again during the period of repeated crime, and there is no special reason to view the defendant's changes in circumstances, such as the defendant's age and behavior, and there is no reason to view that there is no special circumstances.

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

[However, ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the term "the third and third choice" in the application of the law of the court below shall be deleted, and the third and fourth "Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act" shall be deemed to read "Article 148-2 of the former Road Traffic Act (wholly amended by Act No. 15530, Mar. 27, 2018)", and the third and fifth "the choice of imprisonment" shall be deleted.