The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant asserts that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as the grounds for appeal of this case are too unreasonable.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case and the fact that the defendant did not have the same criminal record as imprisonment without prison labor or any heavier punishment and did not cause traffic accidents due to drinking driving of this case, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the following is ruled again

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the facts charged by the defendant and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da1548, Apr. 1,

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Probation, etc. Act;