The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Unless the first instance court’s determination of sentencing is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or the first instance court’s determination of sentencing is deemed to be unreasonable in full view of the newly discovered materials in the appellate court’s appellate court’s determination of sentencing, it is reasonable to respect the first instance court’s determination of sentencing, unless there exist circumstances such as deeming that it is unfair

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing were already revealed and sufficiently considered during the hearing process of the lower court, and there was no new circumstance that could change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. There was two criminal records for the same crime, and the instant drinking driving was conducted during the suspension period of the execution of imprisonment, and the blood alcohol concentration level was considerably higher than 0.178% during the suspension period of the execution of imprisonment, and the Defendant was against his or her mistake, and the same is against the fact that the blood alcohol level was too higher than 0.178%, and even considering all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment, family relationship, health status, the process of and circumstances after the commission of the vehicle, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.