2. It is recognized that the Defendant appears not to repeat a crime by selling a vehicle after the instant crime, and that he/she has a family member to support (child).

However, the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment on two occasions due to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving).

At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was high.

In order to achieve the preventive purpose of punishment, it seems necessary to sentence imprisonment to the defendant, but the court below, after selecting the imprisonment, sentenced the sentence to the lowest sentence of the punishment which reduced the amount of punishment.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, however, the Defendant’s appeal is corrected by adding “as of September 5, 2007” to “the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act” between “the Seoul Southern District Court” and “the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.”