The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (two months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court: (a) determined the sentence against the Defendant; (b) took account of the fact that: (c) the Defendant, under unfavorable circumstances, forged a motor vehicle registration number plate, and attached it to the motor vehicle and operated the motor vehicle; (d) the crime of this case is highly likely to be abused as a means of other crime using the motor vehicle; (e) the crime of this case requires strict punishment to properly manage the risks accompanied by the motor vehicle; (b) the Defendant has the past history of repeated driving and drinking without a license and was under trial on January 23, 2019; (c) attached the forged motor vehicle registration number without any particular crime and repeated driving; and (b) considered the fact that the Defendant has led the Defendant to the crime in favor of normal circumstances; and (c) the Defendant has not been subject to criminal punishment.

As above, the lower court determined the punishment by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances, and also seems to have been reflected in the sentencing process of the lower court.

There is no special change in circumstances that may change the punishment of the court below in the trial.

In addition, the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.