2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant reflects his depth on the crime of this case, and that the above victim does not want the punishment of the defendant under an agreement with the victim G.

However, the Defendant committed the crime of this case again without being aware of the fact that he had been sentenced to a suspended sentence on November 9, 2016 due to a special injury on several occasions, and in particular, even though he was under the suspended sentence after being sentenced to a suspended sentence on the grounds of a special injury, in light of the criminal history and means of the crime, etc., the crime of damaging property and the crime of special injury in this case is very poor in the nature of the crime. In addition, the crime of damaging property of this case is a crime that may cause serious harm to an unspecified person, and the crime of causing a traffic accident while driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol is highly dangerous, and thus, the risk is realized by causing the victims of the accident while driving the vehicle. The degree of driving the vehicle in this case is not minor at the time of the crime of drinking alcohol, the traffic accident is not covered by the comprehensive insurance, and the traffic accident does not reach an agreement with the victims, and all other circumstances of sentencing, including the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc.

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.