Since then, D had the Defendant under the influence of alcohol carried the instant vehicle into a taxi near the home flass where the instant vehicle was parked, but the Defendant was not driving only on the instant vehicle on which he was parked.

2. Determination

A. The following facts can be acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.

① On May 23, 2012, at around 04:03, the Defendant placed the instant vehicle on the front of the Home fluor, and was under the influence of drinking to police officers on the wind to report the occurrence of an accident.

② At the time, the instant vehicle was set up in the reverse direction (in the direction of moving, the direction of driving along the lane on which the vehicle was installed) in the form of entering the front speed of India, and the fronter on the left-hand side of the vehicle turned on the front side of the movement and headlights almost into the front speed of India, and the entire vehicle obstructed most of the vehicle on India and its delivery.

③ At the time, a driver inside the vehicle was installed, and the Defendant was well aware of a driver’s length.

The Defendant was the state of blood alcohol concentration of 0.121%.

④ The distance from the home flass front of the home flass where the instant vehicle was installed to the Defendant’s residence is about 3-400 meters.

B. The summary of the Defendant’s statement was examined by the police three times, and the summary is as follows.

① The instant vehicle was parked in India prior to the instant day.

In order not to cause inconvenience to traffic, parking has not been parked as one day, and the degree of pedestrians has been rhydd with approximately 45 degrees of parking.

(2) At around 22:00, drinking alcohol is completed at D's office at around 23:30, while drinking alcohol is completed.

D, together with D, take a taxi.