The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a net manner and committed the instant crime in depth.

In addition, the defendant, after the crime of this case, has been committed, has not been prevented from driving alcohol again due to the scrapping of cargo vehicles.

In addition, the fact that the defendant is in a position to support his mother and decision-making wife, etc., should be considered favorable to the defendant in the course of the determination of the punishment for the crime of this case.

However, the instant crime is deemed to have driven a cargo vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at the altitude of 0.19% during the period of repeated crime, subject to criminal punishment by the Defendant due to drinking, while driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol at the same level during the period of repeated crime. The Defendant’s act that revealed in the risk of crime due to the occurrence of a traffic accident by driving under the influence of alcohol as above does not seem to be somewhat harsh.

In addition, even though the defendant had a past record of criminal punishment on about seven occasions due to the crime of drinking up to now (including imprisonment with prison labor, once a suspended sentence, three times a suspended sentence), the defendant committed the crime of this case, despite the punishment repeated as above, it seems that the defendant was living with light of traffic laws and regulations.

In addition, the favorable circumstances mentioned above have already been fully reflected in the judgment of the court below.

In full view of other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant’s ground of appeal cannot be accepted.

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.