2. Determination is a favorable condition for the Defendant to recognize the instant crime and reflect the wrongness, and there is a family member to support the instant crime.

However, considering that the social harm of drunk driving is serious and the statutory punishment is continuously raised, it is necessary to strictly punish the crime of drunk driving. At the time of the instant case, the blood alcohol level of the Defendant was high by 0.101%, the Defendant has been punished twice due to drunk driving, and in particular, in 2010, there was a history of causing a traffic accident due to drunk driving, resulting in the death of others and resulting in the death of others, and driving under the influence of a suspended sentence of imprisonment. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was under the suspension of the execution of sentence due to the instant crime.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable for the lower court to have imposed the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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