The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances are favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the depth thereof, the distance of drinking driving is about 200 meters, and the Defendant’s disposal of the instant vehicle and the fact that the Defendant did not repeat the instant vehicle.

However, in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, the court below held that the current Road Traffic Act provides that a person who has violated the prohibition clause on drinking at least twice in order to prevent the driving of drinking which threatens the safety of road traffic and to realize awareness of it, shall be punished more strictly in the event that he once again drives the drinking. The defendant has the records of punishment four times due to driving of drinking (two times absu, two times a suspended sentence) even before the crime of this case. The defendant's blood alcohol concentration is relatively high by 0.145% at the time of the crackdown, and one year has not passed after the suspension period for driving of drinking was terminated, such as the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case at least one year after the suspension period for driving of drinking, and the defendant's age, family relation, criminal records, relationship, sex, act, environment, means and method of the crime, motive and circumstance after the crime of this case, etc., which are disadvantageous to the defendant, and thus, the judgment of the court below should not be reversed to the extent that the punishment of this case is excessively unfair.

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.