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 with 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 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The fact that a defendant recognized his/her mistake and reflects it is favorable to the defendant.

However, in full view of the fact that the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, in particular, without being aware of the period of probation due to drunk driving, and that the nature of the crime is not less than that of the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, background of the crime, means and result of the crime, blood alcohol concentration, driving distance, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below seems to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion by taking into account all the sentencing conditions in the pleading, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, background of the crime, means and consequence, blood alcohol concentration, driving distance, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and there are no special changes in circumstances that could change the sentencing of the court below, it cannot

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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