2. The circumstance favorable to the defendant is that the distance driven by the defendant at the time of the instant crime is short, the injury suffered by the victim is minor, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant has a lot of history of punishment for drunk driving, and in the last 2016, he was subject to the prior action of suspended sentence.

The blood alcohol concentration level is also high at the time of crime.

As above, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within the reasonable scope of discretion by fully taking into account the favorable or unfavorable circumstances to the Defendant, and there is no special change in circumstances that could change the sentencing after the lower judgment.

In addition, examining various conditions of sentencing specified in the records and pleadings of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and criminal records, even though considering the fact that the Defendant faithfully implements the repayment plan of the individual rehabilitation procedure or the Defendant’s work employees want the Defendant’s preference, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

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