도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (b) parked a motor vehicle after drinking the motor vehicle after drinking the motor vehicle due to G and parking problems; and (c) did not drive the motor vehicle after drinking the motor vehicle; and (b) thus, the Defendant cannot establish a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving on the motor vehicle). Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles.
2. The court below found the following circumstances that can be recognized by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the defendant: ① at the time of drinking control on September 1, 2014, the defendant stated the motive for drinking to the police officer as “I am with her friend,” “I am,” and the last place of drinking at C, and did not speak that I am drinking at any other place (Evidence records 8, 9, 13 pages, and 27-3 pages of trial records); ② at the time of the initial police investigation, G, who was the defendant and the defendant's parking, parked in front of the drinking-free car volume, and the defendant tried to park a mountain-free vehicle and park his own car at a different place, and the defendant's oral statement was made at the time of the initial police investigation, and the defendant's oral statement was made at a very low level of 1 to frithly and frithly, and the defendant's oral statement was made at the time of the initial police investigation.
When the defendant speaks that he/she is parked in another place from his/her driver's seat, his/her face is red.