The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, repented in depth and reflected the mistake.

The defendant's failure to drive his or her wrong while driving alcohol without a license can be considered as a factor for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

(Defense Counsel asserts that the crime of this case has the nature of the crime to be suspended, but apart from the partial consideration of sentencing, there is no room to regard each of the crimes of this case, which has already been completed, as a crime of suspension under Article 26 of the Criminal Act. However, since the social harm caused by drinking driving is very serious, it is highly necessary to punish the crime. In particular, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol at 0.11%, was driving on an expressway at a distance of about 40km by entering the expressway, which is considerably under the influence of alcohol, and this constitutes a crime of substantial danger that may cause large human life accidents.

In addition, the defendant has been punished for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Free Driver's License), and in particular, even if he was placed under the prior sentence of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Free Driver's License) on July 5, 2018 and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Free Driver's License) on the grounds that he was under the prior sentence of the suspension of execution, he cannot avoid a strict punishment corresponding to his liability.

In addition, the judgment of the court below also considered the sentencing factors favorable to the defendant, and there is no change in sentencing conditions that can be newly considered in the trial compared to the court below.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, motive and background leading to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is within the reasonable scope of discretion.