The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (4 months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In comparison with the first instance court, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and in the event that the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The Defendant has nine times the criminal history of criminal punishment due to drinking or driving without a license, etc., and the Defendant again committed the instant crime, even though the Defendant was in the state where a summary order was requested by driving without a license again due to driving without a license, since there was no few months since the suspended sentence was sentenced for the same kind of crime. In light of this, inasmuch as the Defendant lacks compliance spirit with the Road Traffic Act and the risk of repeating the crime is considerable, it is necessary to give rise to the awareness of it through a strict punishment.

The lower court determined a punishment in consideration of such overall circumstances, and there is no new reason to change the sentence of the lower court in the first instance.

When comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, family relation, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, as shown in the deliberation of the lower court and the party, the sentence imposed by the lower court is conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is not hot.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.