The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two years of suspended sentence in the imprisonment of eight months, and forty hours of compliance driving lectures) is too unreasonable.

2. On the other hand, it is recognized that there is no record of punishment on the part of the Defendant, in addition to a fine, that the Defendant committed a crime, and that the damaged person does not want the punishment of the Defendant by agreement with the victim, that the degree of injury the victim was relatively minor due to the instant traffic accident, that the vehicle is covered by the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, and that there is no record of punishment on the Defendant.

However, there is a high level of criticism in that the defendant, who had been punished twice or more due to drinking driving, caused a traffic accident while driving again, and caused an injury to the victim, and the blood alcohol concentration at the time of committing the crime is relatively high to 0.13%.

In full view of the above circumstances and other conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the character and conduct, the environment, and the circumstances after the crime, and the circumstances where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015), etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 37 former part, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, “Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act,” in the application of the law of the lower judgment, is obvious that it is a clerical error under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, Article 38(2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, and thus, it is ex officio correction).