We reverse the judgment of the court below.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (No. 1 year: imprisonment of 1 year, and No. 2: imprisonment of 4 months) of the original court is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of each of the above appeal cases. Since each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed within the scope of aggravated concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in this respect.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty, Articles 152 (1) and 43 of the Road Traffic Act (the point of sound driving, the choice of imprisonment), Article 152 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, and Articles 152 (1) and

1. From among concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of adding up the long-term punishment for both crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment) ;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation are against the defendant's confession of each of the crimes of this case, and there is no record of the suspended sentence or heavier punishment, and the defendant's drinking and non-permission.