2. The judgment of the court below takes into account the following factors: (a) the defendant's mistake is recognized and reflects the defendant's mistake; (b) the vehicle of the defendant's driver is covered by a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance; (c) the defendant's driving fee was smoothly agreed with the victim; and (d) the equity should be considered when the judgment was rendered simultaneously with the crime finalized on November 25, 2014; and (c) the detention of the defendant is faced with an economically difficult situation for his family members; (b) however, in light of the defendant's blood alcohol concentration at the time of the crime; (c) the defendant's blood alcohol concentration at the time of the crime; and (d) the situation at the scene of the accident, etc., the possibility of a higher traffic accident was significant; (d) the victim suffered relatively heavy injury for six weeks of medical treatment; and (e) the defendant was punished by a non-driving driver without permission; and (e) the defendant again committed the crime in this case without consideration, even though he had the record of suspension of execution on the traffic accident during a non-driving license on July 2004.

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.