(2) The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the determination on the claim of mental disability, even though the defendant was found to have committed a crime of drinking to a certain extent, in light of the fact that the defendant was aware of the fact that he committed the crime of drinking, but the defendant sent to another vehicle due to the refusal to take passengers. In light of the fact that the defendant did not drink at the time of drinking, and stated the motive and the amount of drinking at the time of the crime, it is not determined that there was an obstacle to the defendant'

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

B. On September 21, 2012, the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is inevitable to impose a sentence on each of the instant crimes (on October 23, 2014) during the period of suspension of execution after having been sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with labor for interference with general traffic by a party member and two years of suspension of execution (decision on the revocation of suspension of execution on December 30, 2014). The lower court’s sentence was the lowest sentence, and thus, cannot accept the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing.

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