The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the order to attend a compliance driving lecture of 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and the fact that the sentencing is determined after the appellate court’s ex post facto review nature, etc., it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions for sentencing compared with the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the first instance judgment is within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the difference between the appellate court’s opinion and the first instance judgment is different from the appellate court’s opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015; 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

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 ordered as per Disposition.