2. The crime of this case, even though the defendant had been punished twice or more due to drunk driving, is a case where the defendant caused a traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol 0.108% without a driver's license of a motor vehicle and causing a traffic accident to cause about two to three weeks medical treatment, and the crime of this case is not weak in its nature, and the driving under the influence of alcohol is a crime that may infringe on the life, body, etc. of a person who is not only the person himself/herself but also the person in need of strict punishment is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, that the family and branch members of the defendant want the defendant's preemptive action by mutual agreement with the victims, that the defendant's family and branch members want not to commit the crime of this case again, and that the defendant's efforts not to commit the crime of this case are more favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc. as well as the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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.