2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

However, there is no change in circumstances to consider the sentencing after the judgment of the court below, and the defendant has been punished several times due to drinking driving and non-licensed driving, and repeatedly commits the crime of drinking and non-licensed driving during the period of repeated crime due to non-licensed driving, the degree of alcohol concentration in blood, the depth of his/her crime, and again commits a re-offending.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the fact that the distance of driving in the state of drinking and the distance of driving in the state of drinking is not less than 2 meters, even if considering the fact that there is a family member to support, and the person desires to leave the Defendant’s preference, the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

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