The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the order to attend a law enforcement lecture 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the fact that the driver is covered by a comprehensive insurance, and the victim of the traffic accident is relatively minor, and that the said victim does not want the Defendant’s punishment under an agreement with the victim E.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was under the influence of alcohol and caused the instant traffic accident; (b) the number of victims of the said accident is up to three; (c) the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, occupation, environment, circumstances leading to the crime; (d) the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, occupation, circumstances leading to the crime; and (e) the first instance court’s sentencing conditions compared to the judgment, and the first instance judgment does not change in the sentencing conditions; and (e) the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, since it is obvious that “victim G” in the 2th page 2 of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in “victim G”, it is corrected ex officio as it is corrected.