Defendant

The appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) of the original judgment is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is against himself/herself; (b) the sale of vehicles after the instant case, etc. does not commit such a crime again; (c) the health of old parents is not good; and (d) the Defendant’s family members and branch members want to take the Defendant’s wife against the Defendant.

However, the current Road Traffic Act provides that a person who has violated the prohibition clause on drunk driving twice or more for the purpose of preventing a drunk driving that threatens road traffic safety and enhancing the awareness thereof shall be sentenced to more severe punishment if he/she drives a drunk driving again. While he/she has been punished four times (two times a suspended sentence of imprisonment and two times a fine) due to a drunk driving, the defendant is driving under the same time again even though he/she was found to have been punished four times (two times a suspended sentence of imprisonment) due to a drunk driving, and the defendant was found to have been driving under the influence of alcohol on May 22, 2015, and he/she was driving under the same time before the lapse of one month, as well as a high level of blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol, such as the fact that a drunk driving is a dangerous crime that may harm the life of others as well as his/her own life, it is unreasonable to deem that the sentence of the court below is too inappropriate in full view of all the sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character, environment, motive, motive, means and consequence after the crime.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.