The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Although the Defendant appealed on the ground that it was unfair due to the Defendant’s excessive punishment (one year of imprisonment) of the lower court, each of the instant crimes was committed by the Defendant immediately after the occurrence of a traffic accident while driving a drinking and immediately after the police regulating the traffic accident, and the nature of the instant crime is not good. In light of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the fact that the Defendant had a relatively high alcohol concentration among blood measured by the Defendant at the time of the instant case, and that the Defendant repeated the crime despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished twice due to the crime of drinking prior to the instant case, even if considering the Defendant’s family relationship, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court for the same reason as stated in its reasoning is unreasonable.

Since the appeal by the defendant is groundless, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the second act of the court below's application of the law to "Road Traffic Act" shall be corrected as "the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371, Jun. 9, 2020)" by ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.