The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the grounds of appeal.

2. It is recognized that the defendant's mistake is divided, and the crime of this case is a violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of drinking), for which the judgment has become final and conclusive, and the crime of this case should consider equity in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act with regard to the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the fact that the crime of this case is not good, the number of times the defendant driven without mandatory insurance, and the age, sex and environment of the defendant, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, and thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices (Provided, That the lower court’s judgment, on September 22, 2016, sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence of one year for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (e.g., a violation of drinking regulations) at the Gwangju District Court on September 22, 2016, and the judgment on September 30, 2016 became final and conclusive.

“Before the judgment of the court below in the first instance: Inasmuch as it is evident that each omission was made in the “1. concurrent treatment of concurrent crimes, Article 37 of the Criminal Act,” the first sentence of Article 39(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure,” following the second and second parallel conduct, the judgment of the court below is added pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.