The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable in light of the following facts: (a) the Defendant, who led to the confession of the facts charged in the instant case; and (b) the Defendant is difficult to implement the community service order as he is going to work, etc.; (c) the sentence imposed by the lower court (a) is too unreasonable.

2. Taking into account the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, the Defendant has been punished several times in the past due to the same or similar crimes (one time imprisonment and six times fines) such as the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) or the violation of the Road Traffic Act (one time and six times fines), and all other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the character, conduct and environment of the Defendant, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed unfair. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, the applicable column of the judgment of the court below

1. Articles 148-2 subparag. 1, 44(1) (a) and 152 subparag. 1 and 43 (a point of driving without a license) of the Road Traffic Act’s Article 148-2 subparag. 1, 44(1) (a point of driving without a license) of the corresponding provision on criminal facts are clear. As such, according to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, “Article 148-2 subparag. 1, 44(1) (a) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 10790, Jun. 8, 2011 and enforced December 9, 201)” of the corresponding provision on criminal facts shall be corrected to “Article 148-2 subparag. 1, 201; Article 152 subparag. 1 and 43 of the Road

.