2. The judgment of the Defendant is based on the following circumstances: (a) the instant crime was committed in depth and reflected by the Defendant; (b) the Defendant undergoes surgery for the chief of a diplomatic mission with an old age of 65; and (c) the Defendant has a good health, such as taking surgery for the chief of a diplomatic mission with an old age of 65.

However, even though the Defendant had been punished twice due to drinking driving, the Defendant committed the instant crime.

At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was very high to 0.261%.

The circumstances alleged by the Defendant appear to have been fully considered in the original judgment, and the sentence imposed by the lower court is the lowest sentence prescribed in the Road Traffic Act (driving) of this case.

Examining the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as equity in the punishment with other similar cases, character and conduct, environment, etc., it is difficult to see that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

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.