2. The judgment below seems to have sentenced the above punishment by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant (the recognition of the crime, reflectivity, and the intention not to drive a drinking again) and unfavorable circumstances (the past record of being punished for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the possibility of criticism during the period of repeated crime due to fraud, etc.).

In light of the aforementioned various sentencing grounds and the fact that the blood alcohol concentration level of this case is high, the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relation, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and other circumstances that can be known by the records, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that the court below made it possible to change the defendant's punishment against the defendant, the sentencing of the court below is appropriate in view of the defendant's health and economic circumstances, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant abused its discretion or deviates from the limits of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.