The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court’s sentence (one year of suspended execution in six months of imprisonment and forty hours of order to attend a compliance driving lecture) is too unreasonable; and

2. Determination

A. According to the records, the court below determined the punishment by taking into account the following factors: (a) the poor quality of the crime was committed; (b) the records of punishment for the same kind of crime were several times; (c) the mistakes were pened and reflected; (d) the degree of injury suffered by the victims was not severe; (c) the victims agreed with the victims and the victims did not want the punishment; (d) the victims did not want the punishment; (e) the victims did not have any history of punishment exceeding the fine; (e) blood alcohol concentration level and health conditions

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial court, and considering the various reasons revealed in the oral proceedings, the lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

C. Therefore, the argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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