The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Although the Defendant had a previous record of driving under the same kind of alcohol, the Defendant was driving under the influence of re-driving, which led to the occurrence of a serious consequence that could not follow the victim’s death.

As a result, the bereaved family members of the victim, including young children, suffered a large amount of mental suffering which could not be punished by the horses, and appeal against the defendant.

In full view of these circumstances, the lower court’s judgment that sentenced the Defendant to the punishment is not unreasonable.

However, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects his depth. At the time, the accident of this case occurred when the vehicle of this case was covered by a comprehensive insurance, so it seems that it would be able to pay insurance money to the bereaved family members of the victim, the defendant deposited 45 million won in total for the victim's bereaved family members by depositing 5 million won in the court room. The defendant seems to have made his own effort to recover the damage. The victim's person who was in a relationship with the defendant seems to have suffered considerable mental suffering due to the victim's death. The victim, even though he was aware of the driving of the vehicle of this case, was accompanied by the vehicle of this case, and the vehicle of the defendant was parked in the vehicle of this case while the vehicle of this case was in conflict with the vehicle of the second line with the vehicle of this case which was stopped temporarily on the new wall. In full view of the circumstances of the accident, etc., the defendant's family members to support the defendant, and the defendant's family members appeal again, the defendant's allegation that the above defendant's imprisonment of this case is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.