2. The distance of the Defendant’s driving at the time of the instant crime is 2 meters south. However, at the time, the Defendant’s blood alcohol content was considerably high by 0.117%, and the Defendant stated that the Defendant was found to have been deprived of the vehicle in order to make it fast at a close place at the police investigation stage. Even according to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant started driving at a certain section beyond 2 meters, rather than driving with the intention to drive the vehicle at the time, but with the intention to operate the vehicle at a certain section beyond it. The Defendant had the history of being sentenced to a fine for the same crime in 2009, and in light of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant criminal records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, and circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

3. If so, 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.