2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for sentencing determination, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In full view of the reasons for sentencing revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, it cannot be deemed that the sentencing of the lower court is too excessive, and the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, taking account of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s failure to submit any new sentencing data; (b) the reason for sentencing revealed in the proceedings of the instant case (in particular, there was a history that the Defendant was punished several times due to drinking driving; and (c) the Defendant was aware of the fact that he/she was under trial due to drinking driving; and (d) was engaged in driving

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit.