A. On December 28, 2017, from around 20:30 to 21:30 on December 28, 2017, the Defendant was aware that he was driving around 22:10 on the same day.

Since then, the Defendant measured alcohol at around 22:54 after 44 minutes of the time when the Defendant was discovered, and the time when drinking was measured as above, constitutes a sudden increase in alcohol concentration during blood.

Thus, at the time of the operation of the defendant, the blood alcohol concentration exceeds 0.05%.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won per punishment) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of fact, the Defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol above 0.05% in blood.

It is reasonable to view it.

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

According to the “report on the circumstance of a driver in charge,” “report on the detection of a driver in charge,” and “book on the use of a drinking measuring instrument,” which was prepared at the time of the measurement of drinking to the Defendant, the time of detection of drinking by the Defendant is 22:50, and the time of the measurement of drinking is 22:54.

In other words, since the result of drinking conducted by the Defendant for about 4 minutes from the crackdown on drinking was 0.05% more than 0.012%, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the crackdown on drinking exceeded 0.05% at least 0.05%.

A police officer D prepared each of the above documents at the time testified in the court of the court below to the effect that “The time for the first detection of the Defendant of this 22:50 stated the date and time of the report, and the date and time of detection for drinking is the time measured at the 22:54 of the date and time of measurement, and the time measured at the 22:54 of the date and time of measurement.”

A defendant filed an appeal against a police officer immediately after drinking is discovered, and against a person who was found late after the defendant.