2. In full view of various sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case including the following facts: (a) the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to a non-licensed driving; (b) the suspended sentence prior to a suspended sentence of imprisonment was revoked due to a non-licensed driving; and (c) the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor due to the revocation of the suspended sentence; and (d) the defendant was punished for two times of drinking driving; (b) the person driving the drinking alcohol in this case within a short time; and (c) there was no change in the quality of the crime; and (d) there was no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment; and (e) the defendant

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, since the part of “the proviso to Article 42” in the proviso to Article 35 and Article 42 of the Criminal Act is obvious that it is a clerical error, the Defendant’s appeal is ex officio deleted under Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.