2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) the fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake and did not repeat the offense; (b) there are family members to support the Defendant; and (c) the fact that the social relationship appears to be relatively obvious.

However, drinking driving is a serious criminal who could cause unexpected behaviors as well as the life and home of others by raising the possibility of traffic accidents. The defendant, prior to the crime of this case, has been punished three times, and in 2016, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months of imprisonment due to drinking driving, even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years due to drinking driving in 2016, and the defendant's blood alcohol concentration at the time is considerably high 0.145% and is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The lower court appears to have determined a punishment within a reasonable scope of discretion by fully taking into account the aforementioned various circumstances favorable to or unfavorable to the Defendant, and there is no special circumstance to change the sentencing after the lower judgment.

In addition, examining the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and criminal records, it is not deemed that the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.