The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment. As such, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the circumstances and circumstances of drinking, the circumstance and the subsequent circumstances of drinking, the distance of drinking, and the blood alcohol concentration, and the history of punishment for driving was four times, and the history of the judgment of drinking was four times, and the prosecution was conducted again after the investigation by an investigative agency and the prosecution was imminent, and all the conditions of the pleadings and the records of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s previous conviction, character, and environment, the lower court’s punishment was too excessive to exceed the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, 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.