The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the purport of the grounds for appeal: (a) the confession and reflect of the Defendant; (b) the location in which the Defendant is required to raise school expenses for his father-child’s father-child’s father-child; and (c) the Defendant is in a state of inconvenience to one bridge due to the past traffic accidents; and (d) the economic situation is not good, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Taking into account the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, even in the past, the Defendant has been punished several times for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (three times a fine and one time a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (one time a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor). Although there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant is deemed to have failed to comply with the police officer’s bathing and development, and the quality of the crime is not good, and the Defendant’s character, conduct and environment, the background and result of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., are considered as having been attached to the sentencing as shown in the oral proceedings. In full view of all the circumstances, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.