However, from the date of the final judgment of this case, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

1. Defendant A

A. On December 30, 2016, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) driving a G car without obtaining a driver’s license from the front of a D cafeteria located in Yongamam-gun C, Namnam-gun, and from approximately 200 meters away from the front of the D cafeteria to the front of the F Kaam-gun, the Defendant driven a G Kaman car without obtaining a driver’s license from around 200 meters.

B. On December 30, 2016, the Defendant also caused a traffic accident that causes damage to the repair cost of the said passenger car while driving the said passenger car in front of the F, while driving the said passenger car on the road in front of the F, while driving the said car on the road, and then, caused the Defendant B, who was on board the said vehicle, to have the police officer called for, “I will drive the vehicle on behalf of Domen.”

“In response to the request of the Court, the police officer sent to the site B had the police officer mind that he would make him make a false confession as if he driven the said car, and accordingly, the police officer K and L, who had the Defendant B sent to the site, caused the Defendant B to escape the criminal by having the police officer make a false statement as if he had done a traffic accident while driving the said vehicle while driving the vehicle while driving the vehicle at the site.

2. Defendant B: (a) the date, time, place, and fact at the port of call No. 1-b; and (b) Defendant A did not cause any traffic accident while operating the said car; (b) Defendant B sent the said car while driving the said car under the influence of alcohol to K and policeman on the traffic accident upon request as stated in the same paragraph; and (c) Defendant B sent the said car while driving the said car under the influence of alcohol.

A who commits a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment by making a false statement was made to escape.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of M by prosecutors;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. A copy of the fact-finding survey report, on-site photographs of traffic accidents, the police interrogation protocol against B, the tea inquiry protocol (G), and the A driver's license register.