The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and one year and six months) imposed by the court below 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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime and reflects the instant crime, etc. are favorable circumstances.

However, the defendant was punished six times for the same crime (the four times of fine, the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, and the one time of imprisonment). In particular, it is unfavorable that the defendant was sentenced to the imprisonment of two years on April 30, 2015 due to the crime of drunk driving and was sentenced to the imprisonment of six months on April 30, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive as a result of the crime of drunk driving during the suspension of execution, and the above suspension of execution was invalidated. The defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of himself during the repeated crime, and the blood alcohol concentration (0.165%) of this case is high, and the odometer (1.5 km) is not short.

The court below determined punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions different from those of the court below in the judgment following the pronouncement of the court below.

In addition, taking into account all the factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and equity in sentencing, etc., it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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.