The above defendant did not pay the above fine.

1. On May 16, 2013, at around 22:14, Defendant A driven a H New Zealand XG car owned by the Defendant with approximately approximately 1.1km alcohol content 0.084% from the front side of the “G pharmacy” to the front side of the “Center” located in the same Dong located in the same Dong as the same day from May 16, 2013.

2. Defendant B knew of the fact that the above Defendant committed a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment as seen above, but, on May 16, 2013, Defendant B knew of the fact that the said case was committed, around 22:35, she was investigated by the Defendant at the street in front of the “Center” located in the substitute of Osan-si. In addition, Defendant B’s police station C, who is investigating the said case, and on May 20, 29 and the same year.

6. 3. On May 16, 2013, the above police station at Osan-si stated that the Defendant driven the above vehicle at the drinking control site around May 22:14, 2013, and caused the criminal to escape.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement in the first trial record;

1. The statements of witnesses K and I in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Each report on actual condition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (the Nos. 48,82,92 of the evidence list);

1. Article 148-2 (2) 3 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Defendant A who selects a fine: Article 151 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse (Defendant A);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act);

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (Defendant A) (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is an offense that seriously damages the function of the criminal justice by causing confusion to an investigative agency and the judiciary, thereby hindering the exercise of the State’s legitimate penal authority. Therefore, it is necessary to punish the criminal. Although the criminal is not appropriate for denying the criminal offense, the criminal is not likely to be committed.