The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol so as to have lost or weak the ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental and physical loss or mental weakness, it is acknowledged that the defendant had a drinking condition at the time of each of the crimes of this case, but in light of the following circumstances, such as the process, method and method of each of the crimes of this case, and the defendant's behavior before and after each of the crimes of this case, the defendant was in a state where the defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The Criminal Procedure Act of Korea, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness as to the unfair argument of sentencing, has a unique area of the first instance judgment as to the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The Defendant appears to have committed each of the instant crimes, and the vehicle driven by the Defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect it, the vehicle of the Defendant is a comprehensive motor vehicle mutual aid, the degree of injury of the victim is relatively heavy, but the lower court appears to have determined the Defendant’s punishment in light of the foregoing circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances that may be considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for more than ten months on January 30, 2015 and on March 16, 2015, even after the period of parole expires.