The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is that the punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Therefore, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and direct principle, where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, as there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment, considering all the circumstances indicated in the arguments and records in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s history of punishment, the circumstances after drinking, the degree of alcohol concentration in blood, the driving distance, and the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, and environment, even if considering all the circumstances alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, it is not recognized that the reasonable scope of discretion of the lower court is excessively excessive to the extent that the sentence imposed by the Defendant should be reversed, and thus, it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no ground for appeal by the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition.