도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable that the sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the participation in the compliance driving lecture 40 hours, community service 80 hours) is too unreasonable.
2. The rationale behind the Defendant is that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected, and that there is no record of criminal punishment of suspension of qualifications or more.
However, in full view of all other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is deemed to be reasonable and is not too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit, given that it is too unreasonable in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant has already been punished three times as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act; and (b) the alcohol content in the blood was high by 0.148% at the time of the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s imprisonment is deemed to be reasonable and unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.