2. It is recognized that the circumstances such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects his mistake, and the health of the Defendant is not good due to mental disorder Grade 3, etc., economic conditions as a basic living recipient, and there is a family member, such as his/her child, etc.

However, the crime of this case is that the defendant drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol 0.114% with blood alcohol concentration, and the case is not less severe in light of the blood alcohol concentration, the fact that there was a history of punishment for a vehicle under the influence of alcohol prior to that time, the fact that the defendant does not seem to have any imminent or inevitable circumstances that the defendant should drive in the influence of alcohol, and the drinking driving is a serious crime that may cause harm to the life and body of others as well as the driver, and the current Road Traffic Act provides that the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol shall be punished more strictly if the defendant violates the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol two times or more for the purpose of preventing the driving under the influence of alcohol and overcoming awareness of it, taking into account the aforementioned favorable circumstances as seen earlier, considering various circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of punishment by the court below is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.