However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Around 00:10 on August 26, 2014, the Defendant driven a Cbenz car under the influence of alcohol by 0.139% from around the 5km section of approximately 5km from around the live-ro 250, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-ro, to the front side of the 250-ro, Seo-gu, Daegu-gu.

2. Around August 28, 2014, the Defendant: (a) asked the Defendant to ask the Defendant to make a statement that he/she driven by an acting engineer in order to conceal the fact that the Defendant driven under the influence of alcohol, such as the preceding paragraph, in the vicinity of the house of the pet in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu; and (b) allowed the Defendant to make a false statement.

Therefore, the Defendant, around 14:00 on September 3, 2014, around 14:0, at the Daegu Southernnam Police Station in Daegu-dong, Daegu-gu, 1701-7, and the transportation investigation team office, the Defendant made a false statement to E as if the Defendant did not drive under the influence of alcohol and as if an acting driver had been driven.

As a result, the defendant instigated E to escape a person who commits a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to reports on the statement of the situation of a driver;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 151 (1) and 31 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the grounds of the order to provide community service and attend a compliance driving lecture is that the Defendant, even though having been subject to punishment for drunk driving, was driving again under the influence of alcohol, and the Defendant instigated another person to escape from punishment. In light of the above, the criminal liability is heavy.

(b).