The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the grounds of appeal.

2. Considering the fact that the accused committed the instant crime again during the period of suspension of execution of the same kind of crime even though the accused had been tried for the same kind of crime, and that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is not low, strict punishment against the accused is required.

However, considering the Defendant’s age, it is recognized that the Defendant’s punishment is too excessive and unfair, given that the Defendant’s crime of this case is not a motor vehicle, but a motor vehicle, and the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the conditions of sentencing specified in the instant argument, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., is considered as being too unreasonable. Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendant is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;