The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant does not have driven a breathous state like the facts charged in this case.

B. The sentence of a fine of three million won imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. Although the Defendant had driven the instant cargo vehicle on February 18, 2012, the Defendant changed the fact that he had driven the instant cargo vehicle on February 18, 2012, the Defendant lost his mind while there was an accident in which the vehicle driven by the Defendant, who was driven by the Defendant, was in prudented, and the Defendant was deprived of his mind, and the Defendant was found to have diced with severe pain after having driven the mind, and there was no fact of driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol as shown in the instant facts charged.

In light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the court below comprehensively based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① a police officer who was called to the scene after hearing the awareness of the occurrence of an accident regarding the Defendant’s vehicle: (a) the court below testified in the court below that “I have made the Defendant feel that I would drink to the new wall after a drinking test; and (b) a police officer E belonging to the Busan Cathal Police Station that investigated the Defendant on March 1, 2012 stated that “I did not assert that I would drink after the accident or not drink at the time of driving, as alleged by the Defendant; and (c) it is common to investigate the circumstances of the accident in the event of an accident; and (d) it is difficult to obtain the Defendant’s self-determination of the accident in the course of drinking after drinking alcohol although I could have a suspicion of drinking after the accident; and (e) it is difficult to obtain the Defendant’s self-determination of drinking after drinking alcohol.