The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. In full view of the following: (a) the grounds for sentencing as stated by the lower court are the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, the records of the crime of drinking alcohol driving, the motive or circumstance of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions as stated in the oral argument at the lower court and the lower court; and (b) the sentence imposed by the lower court is not heavy within the reasonable scope

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, among the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, Article 15 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure is clear that "the punishment prescribed for a violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment" is a clerical error of "a concurrent crime resulting from a violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment". Thus, it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.