2. The fact that the defendant's mistake was properly recognized and reflected, and the distance of the defendant's driving (300m) is relatively short is favorable.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant, who had been punished twice due to drinking driving, and escaped without taking necessary measures to avoid traffic accidents while driving under the influence of alcohol, and the nature of the crime is not good. In particular, the defendant seems to have been in charge of the management of his life-resistant accident after the crime of this case and to have attempted to conceal the crime by drinking alcohol, etc., which are disadvantageous circumstances after the crime of this case.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the age, character and conduct, and environment of the Defendant, etc., the Defendant’s assertion is without merit since the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

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.