2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are that the Defendant’s mistake reflects in depth, and there are circumstances that may be considered in light of the circumstances leading to driving of the instant drinking.

However, even though the defendant had been already punished for the same kind of crime at least four times before the instant case, it is highly likely to criticize that the Defendant again committed the instant crime.

I would like to say.

The lower court sentenced the Defendant to six months of imprisonment by taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, and the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, through the reduction of the amount of imprisonment for one year, which was the lowest possible for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

In full view of the matters on which the sentencing was attached in the trial and the sentencing form, etc., the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no circumstance in which the lower court’s determination of sentencing is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, considering the character and conduct of the Defendant, family relations, the background and result of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence is appropriate and too 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.