The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, 80 hours of community service, 40 hours of compliance driving) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant should be considered in light of the fact that the defendant led to the confession and reflect on the facts of the crime, the fact that the melting vehicle has subscribed to automobile insurance, and the victims and the agreement has been reached smoothly.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant with a high level of 0.126% alcohol level, and the victim 2 was injured by each injury (3 to 4 weeks) by shocking the damaged vehicle that the defendant had driven on the harming vehicle under the influence of 0.126%. The degree of violation of the duty of care is heavy, the damage amount is considerably large, and the defendant has a large number of criminal records due to traffic crimes, such as drinking driving, etc., it is necessary to punish the defendant with severe punishment.

The lower court, including the aforementioned circumstances, determined a punishment by fully taking account of all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the Defendant and deeming that it is within a reasonable scope, and thus, is not deemed unfair because the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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