However, the defendant has a history of criminal punishment for the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the degree of risk of an accident is 0.217% higher at the time of the crime in this case, and the occurrence of a traffic accident under which an injured vehicle was actually in U-turn, and the risk is realized as a result of the occurrence of a traffic accident under which the injured vehicle was in fact under the influence of alcohol, and the situation after the crime is not good, such as finding a police officer who was preparing a document related to the detection of drunk driving after the crime in this case, and threatening him/her to display a breath and threaten him/her, and making it difficult to view that driving under the influence of alcohol is a crime that may cause serious damage to another person's life, body, and property, and the corresponding punishment needs to be imposed in consideration of various circumstances indicated in the records, such as the age, character and behavior, family relationship, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime in this case, even if the defendant claimed in light of other circumstances, it cannot be deemed that the lower sentence of the statutory penalty is too unfair (50 million won).

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

However, the court below's application of the statute

1. Article 70 and Article 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014)’s “Article 70 and Article 69(2) of the former Criminal Act” is clearly deemed to be a clerical error, and such ex officio rectification is made pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.

.