2. It does not seem that new circumstances or special changes are likely to be reflected in sentencing after the decision of the lower court was rendered.

Considering the circumstances alleged by the defendant, ① driving under drinking is a crime that may cause serious harm to another person’s life and body, ② alcohol concentration (0.209%) or Defendant’s statement (Evidence No. 13 of the evidence record) that “at the time when driving under drinking is restricted, the Defendant seems to have been driving under drinking,” and such Defendant’s behavior was a very dangerous act that may cause a large-scale accident, ③ the Defendant had already been punished for driving under drinking, ③ the power of having already been punished for driving under drinking was twice (including once a suspended sentence) so it appears that the Defendant had not made any effort after the instant crime, ④ the fact that the Defendant’s act was suspected to have been subject to mental treatment, etc., ④ the circumstances such as the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration (0.209%) or that it was inevitable for him to have no driving under drinking under the influence of his agent, ⑤ the circumstances that the Defendant had already claimed to be considered to have been under the favorable influence of driving under drinking, ⑤ the number of the Defendant’s previous conviction, ⑤ the Defendant’s age.