The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Even when considering the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a fine twice as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in 201 and 2012, even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in 2013, and a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in 2013, the current Road Traffic Act provides that a person who violated the prohibition clause of drinking driving twice or more shall not be subject to a more severe punishment for the purpose of preventing a drunk driving that threatens road traffic safety and enhancing awareness of it, and that there is a family member to support the vehicle, etc., the defendant is sentenced to a fine twice or more for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in 2011 and 2012, and the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in 2013 and without a license, the defendant seems to have been sentenced to a more severe punishment in light of the defendant's motive and circumstances that are favorable to the defendant.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.