2. The Defendant, who recognized the instant crime, runs against the Defendant.

At the investigation stage, the defendant agreed with the bereaved family members of the victim, and the bereaved family members do not want the punishment of the defendant.

Defendant has no record of punishment, except for those who have been punished twice by a fine for about 20 years.

A child who suffers from a old-age or brain disease that must be supported by the defendant, and when the period of detention of the victim is long, a difficulty can be given to the dependent.

(A) The defendant has been divorced from his spouse in around 1991 and has supported his or her father and child alone). However, the defendant's death caused a traffic accident while driving while under the influence of alcohol, and the crime is very heavy.

Due to the instant traffic accident, there was a serious result that the victim could not be able to die.

The defendant's blood alcohol concentration level is not lower than 0.092%.

In light of the above circumstances, even if the defendant considered the circumstances that are favorable to the reasons for appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing.

Furthermore, there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.

Defendant’s assertion that the sentencing of the lower court is unreasonable is rejected.

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.