The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The sentence (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Each of the crimes of this case is that the defendant driving a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance under the influence of alcohol level 0.127%, while driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol level 0.127%, causing injury to the victims by shocking the damaged vehicle in violation of the signal and damaging the damaged vehicle, and the nature of the crime is very heavy.

In the past, the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case even though he had been punished three times due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Until the trial, the Defendant did not agree with the victims, and did not endeavor to recover from damage.

In light of the above circumstances and other factors, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee (hereinafter referred to as 8 months of imprisonment) / [the scope of the recommended sentence] the aggravated area ( August-1 and June) of the type of general traffic accident (the scope of traffic accident injury) [special persons] the aggravated area (Article 3(2) of the School Special Act (Article 3(2) of the School Special Act), it cannot be said that the sentence imposed by the court below beyond the lower limit of the recommended sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.