2. It is true that there are conditions for sentencing favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case and reflects it, and that the defendant does not have a distance from driving under the influence of alcohol.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was punished several times as the same type of crime; and (b) the Defendant was punished as a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) as stated in the first head of the crime in the lower judgment; and (c) again committed the instant crime within the repeated crime period; (b) the Defendant’s blood alcohol content as 0.113%; and (c) the Defendant’s blood alcohol content as 0.113%; and (d) other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, etc.,

Therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel's above assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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