2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is hard to believe that the defendant's appeal that he was diving in the deaf-do was just a scam, and it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

1) D consistent from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, consistent with D, “Around March 29, 2014, the Defendant driven a car and parked in front of his house and obstructed the gate. At the time, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, and he reported 112. The Defendant stated that “A police officer who was dispatched to the scene upon receiving a report at the time when he was reported at the time of the trial of the lower court, was able to obtain the Defendant and then transferred to the police.”

There shall be no shouldering the accused who has been divingd in the deaf-gu.

At the time, the smelling of the defendant was considerably snick and continued to be snick.

피고인이 차를 댔다는 D의 창고 쪽으로 가보니 출입문 앞에 승용차가 주차된 상태였다.

At the first time, the defendant talked with no roadway, and the phone number attached to the vehicle was blicked with the phone number, and the defendant blicked with the phone mark at the bar of the defendant.

‘The statement' is being made.

B. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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