2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness exists in the area unique to the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing, and the fact that the court of first instance ex post facto character of the appellate trial, etc., if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance trial, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). (b) It is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

However, the court below seems to have determined the defendant's punishment in consideration of all such circumstances, and there is no particular change in circumstances in the matters which are the conditions for sentencing after the sentence of the court below.

Without a vehicle license, the Defendant driven a long distance of about 10 km in the state of severe alcohol 0.154% in blood alcohol concentration, and the quality of the crime is not less exceptionally, and the reason for the Defendant’s assertion is difficult to justify such crime.

The defendant has been punished by a fine on several occasions due to driving without a license or driving under drinking.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc. and various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

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.