The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. The Defendant, who judged that the instant crime was committed in a net manner, was committed in depth, and the mistake was repented in depth.

In addition, it seems that there is a certain obstacle to obtaining the driver's license for reason that the defendant retires from elementary school and can not read Korean language well.

Furthermore, the Defendant was able to live as a daily-service sculpture, and was under the direction of the head of the construction site site to drive a vehicle at the time of the construction site and to move the materials, such as bricks, to another site, and the Defendant committed the instant crime.

In addition, the fact that the Defendant suffered from the heart and had been hospitalized several times, etc., which did not have good health conditions, should be considered favorably to the Defendant in the course of determining the punishment for the instant crime.

However, the instant crime committed, however, the Defendant driven a cargo vehicle at about 2 km section without a driver’s license, and the Defendant completed the execution of imprisonment on December 16, 201 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) and committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime. As such, the punishment of the illegality is not weak.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and other various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable, even if it is too unreasonable, considering that the Defendant had a record of criminal punishment (two times of imprisonment and one fine) for three times due to an unlicensed driving, and the favorable circumstances as seen earlier have already been fully reflected in the judgment of the lower court.

Therefore, Defendant’s ground of appeal cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.