The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (one year and three months of imprisonment) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized and reflected, and that the defendant's vehicle is covered by the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance is favorable to the defendant.

However, while the Defendant was punished once due to driving of alcohol or driving without a license for driving under the influence of alcohol, one time due to driving under the influence of alcohol, one time due to driving without a license, and one time due to driving without a license, while driving under the influence of alcohol or without a license for driving under the influence of alcohol, it was found that the Defendant, while driving under the influence of alcohol or without a license for driving under the influence of alcohol and without a license for driving under the influence of alcohol, was faced with personal damage and property damage (personal damage: five persons, three physical damage) caused by the negligence committed by the central line, was locked, and was discovered again after two years thereafter, while driving under the influence of alcohol or without a license for driving under the influence of alcohol and without a license for driving under the influence of alcohol. Considering the nature of the crime and the circumstances after the crime, the Defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, and the degree and result of the negligence, the Defendant's assertion is not accepted.

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 groundless.