2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected, that the victim of the crime of injury was smoothly agreed with the victim, and that the above victim did not want to punish the defendant, and that the vehicle was scrapped.

On the other hand, the defendant has been punished three times as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) including the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in Seoul Eastern District Court on August 20, 2010, when the defendant was sentenced to two years of suspended sentence due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) at the Seoul East District Court on August 20, 2010, and the defendant has been punished three times as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license). The blood alcohol concentration at the time of drinking driving is higher than 0.114%, the police officer who received a report that the defendant's driver's driver's driver's vehicle is trying to stop the vehicle in order to take a drinking test, but the police officer requested the driver to stop again while moving without disregarding the defendant and making a second stop, and the police officer failed to comply with the request of the investigative agency to appear disadvantageously after his/her residence without complying with the request of attendance.

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

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.