The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in its summary of the grounds for appeal.

2. The defendant, who had been punished for a violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the operation of a motor vehicle without a license for drinking, a non-licensed driving, or a mandatory insurance, committed each of the crimes in this case where the defendant drives a motor vehicle not covered by the mandatory insurance without obtaining a driver's license in the state of 0.214% and 0.194% of the blood alcohol concentration. Considering the need for severe punishment for driving under the influence of drinking, and the defendant's attitude that disregards the law, it is necessary to severely punish the defendant.

However, all of the crimes of this case are committed by the defendant, and it seems that the defendant committed a mistake in depth, and the risk of drinking driving and the severe weight of penal laws through confinement life for about four months seems to have been significantly differentiated. In particular, the court below's decision is unfair in light of the following factors: (a) the defendant's age, character, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, etc. (the spouse is divorced from his or her spouse and his or her parents are returned to her parents) has a sincere life for his or her two married children; (b) he or she has expressed his intention not to repeat the crime; and (c) the defendant's friendship also desires to work as office staff in the R company run by her friendship; and (d) the defendant's friendship is also against the same purport; (c) there is no punishment force exceeding fines; and (d) there is no punishment force exceeding the crime committed in violation of traffic-related laws and regulations; and (e) the sentencing conditions of this case, such as the sentencing conditions indicated in the records after the crime, are too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the following judgment is rendered again after pleading.

[Discied Judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.