The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant should not repeat the crime by reflecting the error of the crime in depth, and the crime of March 13, 2014 is considered in the circumstances where the defendant's wife was hospitalized in the hospital by himself due to an empty blood and functional womb, etc., and the defendant seems to have driven the vehicle for a clerical error.

The defendant's health is not good, such as receiving hospitalized treatment due to alcohol-related diseases and alcohol addiction, and there are five children to support, and the wife and children of the defendant want to grow up with their preference against the defendant.

However, the Defendant had been punished several times due to drinking, unlicensed driving, and traffic-related crimes (five times a fine only after 201, three times a suspended sentence), and on November 16, 2012, sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months, sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years in accordance with the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death and Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving). On February 15, 2013, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even though the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 15, 2013.

Even though there are reasonable grounds to recognize that a person was driving without a license and driving under the influence of alcohol, the police officer's drinking test was refused, and the situation after the crime is also likely to be subject to criticism, such as requesting a person to drive on his/her behalf and make it possible for him/her to do so.

Nevertheless, only 20 days after the crime was committed, again, the crime of unlicensed driving, drinking and unlicensed driving was committed repeatedly, and the traffic accident caused the parked other person's vehicle while driving without a license, and the blood alcohol concentration was very high to 0.292%.

In addition, considering all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.