2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crime and reflects on the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime, committed the second offense, and committed the second offense, and that the blood alcohol level in this case was relatively higher than 0.061%, and that the Defendant is a family member to support the Defendant, such as the mother of 89 years old who suffers dementia and the disabled, and that there is no criminal record, and that the Defendant was not healthy at 64 years of age.

However, it is also recognized that the circumstances after the crime are not good, such as the defendant's previous convictions, including once a suspended sentence due to drinking driving or driving without a license, the cancellation of the driver's license in 201, and the fact that the driver's license in 201 would not re-acquisition the driver's license until now, and the driver's license would be likely to drive without a license. In this case, the vehicle parked while driving without a license in this case conflicts with the vehicle and leaving the site without any measure.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances, such as the character, conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the court below after the judgment of the court below, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

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.