The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) in light of various sentencing conditions in the instant case’s summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, there are favorable circumstances for the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant confessions all the criminal facts of the instant case and repents his mistake.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime, which is the same criminal act during the suspended execution period, even though the judgment was finalized on February 22, 2012 due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents on February 14, 2012, the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents”), the Defendant again committed the instant crime, which is the same criminal act during the suspended execution period, even though the judgment became final and conclusive on February 22, 2012. The Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the instant crime was higher than 0.115%, the Road Traffic Act amended on June 8, 201 provides that the person who violated the prohibition clause on drinking driving twice or more times shall be punished strictly if he/she drives under the influence of alcohol, and the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, and environment, etc., with an intention to prevent the traffic safety and to realize awareness of this, the sentence of the lower court is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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.