2. The judgment below seems to have sentenced the above punishment by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant (the fact that the blood alcohol concentration is very high, the defendant has already been sentenced to a fine four times due to drinking, driving without a license, and has been sentenced two times of imprisonment, the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for two times, and the suspension of driving again during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and the driving without a license again during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime) and the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant.

In light of the aforementioned grounds for sentencing and the defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, various circumstances revealed by the records, and other circumstances that the court below did not have any special circumstances or changes in circumstances to the defendant’s punishment, even if considering the defendant’s health and economic circumstances, etc., the court below’s sentencing is appropriate, and it cannot be deemed that there was abuse of discretionary authority or deviation from the limits of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.