도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The sentence of the lower court (the sentence of imprisonment for six months, the suspended sentence of two years, and the order to attend a law-abiding driving lecture for forty hours) is too unreasonable.
2. We examine the judgment in light of the following circumstances: (a) the recognition of and reflects on the instant crime; and (b) there are family members to support the Defendant.
However, the alcohol level of the defendant's blood was considerably high, and the distance of the defendant's driving is also short.
In full view of the fact that it is difficult to see that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though the Defendant had been punished for drinking driving in 2012 and 2013 twice, etc., the Defendant committed the instant crime at a disadvantage to the Defendant, including the fact that there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court, and the fact that there is no change in the sentencing conditions in comparison with the lower court’s holding, it does not seem to be unfair because the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
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.