A. In full view of the misunderstanding of the facts as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the part of the judgment below not guilty) (the part of the judgment below which acquitted the Defendant), the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the occurrence of the instant traffic accident, the Defendant’s personal condition, and the Defendant’s black stuff images before and after the occurrence of the accident, the Defendant was in a difficult condition to drive normally due

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, protection observation, community service, and order to attend a lecture) is too unfasible and unreasonable.

2. In full view of the circumstances indicated by the lower court in its reasoning, which were acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court as follows: (a) the Defendant reported and requested assistance to the 119 Defendant immediately after the accident; and (b) the evidence presented by the Prosecutor alone was in a situation where normal driving of the Defendant was difficult due to influence of drinking at the time of the instant case

It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

This part of the appeal is dismissed.

3. The crime of this case as to the unjust assertion of sentencing is committed by the defendant's death by causing a traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol, and thus, the defendant's negligence and the result therefrom are serious, and the alcohol concentration level in blood was not less than less than 4 months. However, there are no records of criminal punishment. However, there are no records of criminal punishment on the part of the defendant.