The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances are favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant both recognized and reflected the instant crime, and that the issue was not serious in light of the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the instant crime, and that the Defendant did not repeat the instant vehicle by disposing of it, etc.

However, considering the above favorable circumstances, the court below seems to have already determined a sentence by discretionary mitigation, and the current Road Traffic Act provides that a person who has violated the prohibition clause on drunk driving at least twice in order to prevent the drunk driving threatening to the safety of road traffic and to oversee the awareness of it, shall be sentenced to more severe punishment when he/she drives under the influence of alcohol at least twice. The defendant has been punished four times prior to the crime of this case (two times a fine and two times a suspended sentence). In particular, it is unfavorable circumstances such as the defendant's age, family relation, criminal record, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc. before the crime of this case is committed, and the defendant committed the crime of this case since it has not been less than one year since the suspended sentence due to drunk driving was too excessive. In full view of all the sentencing conditions in the arguments of this case, it cannot be determined that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

3. 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.