2. Determination

A. According to the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there exists an area unique to the first deliberation on sentencing in light of the fact that the sentencing exists in the appellate court’s ex post facto heart character, etc., it is reasonable to respect the first-oriented sentencing in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first-oriented trial, and the first-oriented sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). (B) Each of the instant crimes is found to be subject to punishment by the Defendant in light of the following: (a) each of the instant crimes was driven by the Defendant while under very severe alcohol concentration of 0.239%; (b) resulting in a traffic accident, resulting in injury to two victims; (c) one of the instant crimes was suspended execution once due to the Defendant’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (injury to driving), one of the crimes under the Road Traffic Act, etc.

However, the above circumstances were already launched during the oral argument of the court below, and there was no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the decision of the court below was made, the defendant's error is recognized and reflected, the victim's injury is relatively minor, the victim expressed his intention not to punish at the investigation stage, the vehicle of the defendant was purchased by comprehensive insurance, the defendant's sale of the vehicle after this case, the defendant is a recipient of basic living, and the health status is not good, and other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship, and the means and result of the crime, etc., are too uneasable.