The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime is an element of sentencing that can be considered for the Defendant.

However, the current Road Traffic Act provides that a person who has violated the prohibition clause on drinking at least twice in order to prevent the driving of drinking which threatens the safety of road traffic and to realize the awareness thereof shall be punished more strictly when he/she drives the drinking again. The defendant committed the crime in this case, including that he/she was issued a summary order on the two occasions before the crime in this case, including that he/she committed the crime in this case, before he/she committed the crime in this case, he/she was sentenced to a summary order on the two occasions before he/she committed the crime in this case. There are three criminal records including the defendant's three times punishment, and the defendant repeats the driving without a license within a short period of time. In light of the fact that there is a high possibility of recidivism in light of the defendant's repeated driving of drinking without a license, it appears that the alcohol concentration in blood at the time of driving seems to have been 0.324% high enough to make it impossible to drive the drinking, and the defendant's physical damage caused a traffic accident while driving the drinking without a license, the defendant's age, circumstances before and after the crime in this case.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.