2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include the following: (a) the Defendant is closely reflecting each of the instant crimes; (b) the victim did not want to be punished by the Defendant in agreement with the victim of the crime of damage to property; (c) the social relationship is clear; and (d) the victim was receiving medical treatment for alcohol dependence; and (c) the Defendant has made efforts to improve his/

However, the crime of damaging special property of this case is that the victim, who was a chain, destroyed a vehicle owned by the victim by using each item on the ground that the victim did not receive a telephone, and the nature of the crime is not very good; the defendant had been convicted of driving alcohol or without a license; in particular, even after being prosecuted for the crime of damaging the above special property, the defendant committed the crime of damaging drinking or without a license; and the driving of drinking is a crime that may cause serious harm to an unspecified person; and the social risk is considerably high; the alcohol concentration of the defendant's blood at the time of the crime of this case does not exceed 0.105%; and the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered to be too 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 on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.