2. The judgment follows: (a) the Defendant made a statement that he/she would not repeat again when he/she made a confession of the crime of this case and divided his/her depth; (b) the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is relatively low; and (c) the Defendant’s economic situation appears to be insufficient; (b) the crime of this case is highly likely to cause traffic accidents by driving his/her vehicle under the influence of alcohol level 0.050%; (c) the crime of this case is not likely to be criticized; (d) the Defendant has the history of being sentenced to a fine for the same kind of crime in 2004; (e) the Defendant has the history of being sentenced to criminal punishment for the crime of this case (10 times of fine, imprisonment suspension twice of sentence suspension); and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and environment, motive and background of the crime of this case, the Defendant’s motive and consequence of the crime of this case; and (e) the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant’s punishment of this case is too inappropriate after considering various circumstances asserted by the lower court.

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