2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, and reflects the fact that the victims agree with the victims, and there is no previous conviction in addition to the punishment of the defendant, etc.

However, the Defendant had been punished five times since 2011 for committing an act of causing a traffic accident while driving a drinking without a license, driving without a license, or driving without a license, and was forced to drive a motor vehicle on April 25, 2016 (the instant crime No. 1). On May 10, 2016, the Defendant was issued a summary order on which he/she was discovered that he/she had been driving without a license again on May 10, 201, and was tried on April 25, 2016 by committing an offense on November 3, 2016 when he/she was tried to drive a crosswalk without a license. In addition, on November 3, 2016, the Defendant was able to drive a motor vehicle without a license, and he/she was able to take care of the victim J. 6 of the instant case (the instant crime of taking care of the victim J. 2).

In addition, when comprehensively considering the defendant's age, sex, occupation, environment, circumstances leading to the crime, etc., the conditions of sentencing indicated in the records, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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 them (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

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.