The appeal is dismissed.

2. Determination is reasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s confession and reflects all of the instant crimes; (b) the degree of injury suffered by the victim E and G appears to be relatively insignificant; and (c) the Defendant’s return of the stolen cargo vehicle was made.

However, the crime of this case is being driven without a driver's license while under the influence of alcohol after the defendant stolen another person's cargo vehicle.

In full view of the following factors: (a) the victims of an accident have suffered personal and material damage; (b) the victims have escaped from the scene without any special measure; (c) the nature of the crime is very bad; (d) the victims have suffered physical damage; and (e) the victims have been sentenced to the same criminal records several times; and (e) the defendant has been sentenced to a sentence for a part of the same kind of crime; (c) the victims have committed the crime of this case even during the period of repeated crime of the same kind; (d) the victims have not been agreed with the victims up to the trial; and (e) other all the sentencing conditions such as Defendant age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance before and after the crime

3. 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 groundless. It is so decided as per

(However, on the 6th day of the judgment of the court below, the "Violation of the Road Traffic Act (U.S.)" inhh is corrected as the "Violation of the Road Traffic Act (U.S.)".