The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with labor for not less than 10 months) by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the above punishment by taking account of the following: (a) the Defendant, during the same period of suspension of execution, once again drives under the influence of alcohol, without a license, and the recognition of the instant crime; and (b) there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the fact that the defendant had been absent on the date of sentencing and the detention warrant was issued due to his/her continuous absence on the date of sentencing, the sentencing of the court below does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the sentencing of the court below is too excessive, in full view of various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case,

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. 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.