The punishment of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment is a favorable sentencing factor, such as the fact that the defendant divided his mistake into one, and reflects the defendant's wrong, that the vehicle driven by the defendant is relatively low in danger, and that the defendant is economically difficult.

However, there are many criminal records of the defendant due to drinking or unlicensed driving, and in particular, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for six months on October 8, 2013 due to drinking or unlicensed driving, and the defendant committed the crime of this case in spite of the fact that he committed the crime of this case even though he was currently under probation, is an unfavorable sentencing factor.

In addition, considering the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, as a whole, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and inappropriate. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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

[However, ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, it is corrected that the phrase "an increase in concurrent crimes" is added to the end of "an increase in concurrent crimes" in the application of the statutes of the court below.