The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal: Sentencing;

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court.

In addition, each of the crimes in this case, including the details and motive of the crime, motive, means and result of the crime, drinking volume, majority of the same criminal records, and the court's repeated crime of non-driving without mandatory insurance after the cancellation of the driver's license on September 27, 2008, despite the repeated action of the court, has been repeatedly prevented without compulsory insurance, and the regulations on punishment for non-driving of drinking have been greatly strengthened since June 25, 2019 due to changes in social awareness about driving of drinking, and the circumstances after the crime have been committed (in particular, it is discovered that additional driving of drinking has been discovered for three months after the detection of the first drinking of this case), and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the arguments and records of this case including the age, character, occupation, family relationship, economic situation, etc. of the defendant, even if considering the personal circumstances of the defendant, the court below's sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant for a period of two years is not recognized to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal cannot be accepted, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.