The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for a term of two years, and fine of two hundred thousand won) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data to the Defendant in the trial room, and even considering the various sentencing factors in the instant pleadings, including various circumstances considered in sentencing, the lower court’s sentencing exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

In particular, in light of the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol content at the time of each of the instant crimes was considerably high by 0.178% and 0.160%, it is more so in view of the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol content at the time of each of the instant crimes was significantly high by 0.178% and 0.160%, and the risk of causing serious human and material damage was high, and that in fact,

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per

However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the term “application of the law” of the lower judgment is as follows: “Article 5-11(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes” in the pertinent provision of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the “the choice of punishment” stated in the “Article 5-1(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes” before the amendment by Act No. 16922 of Feb. 4, 2020; “former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2, 3, 38(2), 50, and 42 of the Criminal Act,” respectively.