The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The extent of injury suffered by the victims is not severe, and the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

However, even though there are many kinds of records of criminal punishment for the same traffic crime (limited to five previous convictions for driving and refusing to measure drinking. The defendant is sentenced to five months of imprisonment on March 24, 2005, two years of suspended sentence in September 13, 2012 due to refusal to measure drinking, two years of suspended sentence in September 13, 2012, and majority of previous convictions without driving).

The victims of a traffic accident are injured, and considering the risk of drinking driving itself and the seriousness of the result of the occurrence, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly, and it is not agreed with the victims.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and the environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.