2. It is recognized that the Defendant’s judgment should take into account the fact that the Defendant scraped the instant motor device bicycle and does not repeat again, that is, economic circumstances are not good, and that the equity should be taken into account when the judgment is rendered concurrently with the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) at which the judgment became final and conclusive.

However, the Defendant had been under criminal punishment five times due to drinking driving in 2001 and four times due to driving without a license, and the Defendant committed the instant crime while being prosecuted and tried for a crime, such as violation of traffic laws (driving of alcohol), etc. at the time of the instant crime; the Defendant’s blood alcohol level was high at the time of the instant crime; there was no change in circumstances that could change the Defendant’s punishment; and the Defendant’s age, sex and behavior, environment, details and motive leading to the instant crime, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., comprehensively taking account of all the sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant records and changes, 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.