2. The judgment of the court below is based on the following circumstances: although the defendant made a confession of the crime of this case while the defendant is in contravention of the punishment and suspended execution twice due to drinking driving, the crime of this case is driving a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance without a driver's license in the state of drinking alcohol concentration of 0.130% during the suspended execution period despite the fact that the crime of this case was committed in spite of the fact that the defendant had been sentenced to a fine and suspended execution twice due to drinking driving, and the nature of the crime is not easy, and driving under the influence of drinking is a crime that may threaten not only the driver's life but also another person's life, and there is a need to strictly punish the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive or circumstance of the crime, means and result of the crime, and other various circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing such as the punishment after the crime. Thus, the defendant'

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

(However, according to Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, Article 8 is corrected to add "Article 8" to "Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act" of the corresponding legal column for criminal facts in the context of the application of the law of the court below.