The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) by the lower court is too unreasonable;

(2) It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court’s determination, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentencing of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance court’s judgment solely on the ground that the difference between the views of the appellate court and the appellate court is somewhat different from the opinions of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). According to the foregoing legal doctrine, the instant crime is deemed to drive a vehicle under the influence of alcohol despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished several times due to the crime of the Road Traffic Act, including the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, even though the Defendant had been under the influence of punishment due to the crime of the Road Traffic Act, including the suspension of the execution of imprisonment. In light of the fact that the distance of driving under the influence of alcohol (as much as 20km) is reasonable and that the blood alcohol level at the time is very high as 0.10% high, even if the Defendant considered the circumstances of driving under the influence of the Defendant and the circumstances such as the Defendant’s health condition at the time, it is inevitable

Nevertheless, there is no change in the circumstances where the lower court’s punishment is changed due to the failure to submit new sentencing data, other than the above circumstances, and considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, the circumstances leading to the instant crime and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and is in excess of the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.