All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

The costs of lawsuit in the original instance and the trial shall be assessed against the party.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles [1] (1) The Defendant only taken a shot paper containing alcohol and a sampling sample after the completion of driving, and did not drive under the influence of alcohol.

(2) The result of the drinking test conducted by the Defendant when the Defendant was unlawfully forced shall not be used as evidence of guilt.

B. The respective sentence of the lower court’s 1 and 2 (the first instance judgment: 2 years of suspended sentence in one year of imprisonment; 160 hours of community service; 40 hours of lecture for compliance driving; 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below was rendered against the defendant, and the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold the above two appeals together with other appeals cases.

Since each crime of the judgment of the court below is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined in the following paragraphs.

3. Judgment as to the Defendant’s allegation of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles as to the first instance judgment

A. Although the lower court alleged that the Defendant had no driving under drinking, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and sentenced the Defendant guilty on the following grounds.

After the completion of driving, the Defendant only drinks containing alcohol, but did not drink at the time of driving.

However, the following facts and circumstances recognized by the evidence of the ruling, i.e., a witness E, under the influence of alcohol, is consistently in an investigative agency and in this court: