The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The part concerning mental and physical disorder is not stated in the reason for appeal submitted by the defense counsel, but the corresponding part is stated in the reason for appeal submitted by the defendant, and the corresponding assertion is withdrawn.

There is no other evidence to judge that there is no evidence.

Defendant at the time of committing the 2017 Highest 398 Crime: Provided, That it is apparent that he/she has asserted on the case 398 Highest 2017 Highest 398, and therefore, it is not deemed that he/she has asserted mental disorder on the non-licensed driving

Under the influence of alcohol, there was no or weak ability to distinguish things or make decisions.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of various circumstances, such as the background of the crime committed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the conduct before and after the crime, and the Defendant’s memory on the situation at the time of the special injury and special confinement, etc., the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things at the time, or make decisions.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. Determination 1 on an unfair assertion of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and a discretionary judgment is made within reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on the statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In full view of the data newly discovered in the course of the appellate court's sentencing hearing, the first sentencing judgment is judged as is.