2. The lower court determined the Defendant’s punishment by taking account of the following circumstances confirmed through the entire records and the purport of the pleading.

The favorable circumstances: ① the Defendant is the confession of the crime of this case from the date of the third public trial of the lower court; ② the mistake is divided; ③ the Defendant has had the record of being punished twice due to drinking driving; ② the Defendant had a relatively high level of her blood level; ③ the Defendant again committed the crime of drinking under paragraph (2) of this case at the time when the first public trial of the lower court was conducted on May 24, 2016, although he was indicted due to the fact that the Defendant had committed the crime of drinking under paragraph (1) of the lower public trial of the lower court; ④ the Defendant actively made a false statement with a view to evading his responsibility for driving under the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2) of the lower public trial of the lower public trial; ⑤ the Defendant submitted a false statement to the investigative agency or the lower public trial of the lower public trial on each crime described in paragraph (3) of the lower public trial and submitted a false statement to the Defendant’s family member’s family member selection process, such as the Defendant’s family member selection process and the Defendant’s family member selection process.

Although normal data such as assertion and submission of a medical certificate were submitted, the lower court’s determination on sentencing is at its discretion, even if the lower court’s determination is based on the circumstances confirmed through the above additional data that were appropriately determined by the lower court.