The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 148-2(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 10790, Jun. 8, 2011; effective December 9, 2011) provides that a person who has violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act on at least two occasions, once again, shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for at least one year but not more than three years for a person who drives a motor vehicle while under influence of alcohol, in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and by a fine of at least ten million won.

The interpretation that the aforementioned provision of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, which was amended to “not less than twice in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act,” as stipulated in Article 148-2 subparag. 1 of the Road Traffic Act, includes a person before driving alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act on or before December 9, 2011, cannot be deemed as a violation of the principle of unreasonable punishment or the principle of infinite, or the principle of no liability and the principle of no equality (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do10269, Nov. 29, 2012). The lower court is justifiable to have determined to the same effect, and there is no error by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine or omitting the relevant decision.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.