2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, that there is a family member to support, and that the defendant should consider the balance with the final judgment of the first head of the crime of this case as stated in the original judgment at the same time.

However, the defendant's driving under the low blood alcohol level (0.112%). The defendant was indicted for violating the Road Traffic Act (M.112%) and was placed in the court of first instance, and was placed in the court of first instance, and again committed the crime of drinking and unlicensed driving in this case while the court of appeal was under suspension of execution, and attempted to pretend others as drivers to avoid the crime. In addition, it seems that the nature of the crime is not very good and there is no particular awareness about drinking driving. In addition, it is the fact that there is one time of suspended sentence, six times of fine for the same crime, and that there was two times of suspended sentence and one time of fine for the crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the circumstances and motive, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation of unfair sentencing is not acceptable.

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