The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant drinking alcohol in a restaurant and was a substitute driver; (b) another person was driving on behalf of the subway station; and (c) the Defendant was unaware of the circumstances leading up to the accident due to the locked of the vehicle, and the Defendant was seated in the driver’s seat due to a clerical error; and (d) the police officer was only taking a breath test.

There is no evidence that the defendant has driven, and the statements of witnesses who have been designated as the driver are not consistent, and thus, they cannot be believed.

2. According to the evidence of judgment, the traffic accident involving the Defendant’s vehicle parked at the site occurred. The police officer, who called to the site, asked the Defendant that the reported person was the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident, asked the Defendant about the background of the accident, but snicking, snicking, making a drinking measurement, and measuring the alcohol level at 0.145%, as the blood alcohol level in the blood was measured at 0.145%, the Defendant requested blood measurement at the neighboring hospital, prepared a written consent, gathered, and measured the blood alcohol level at 0.196% as a result of the appraisal.

With respect to the circumstances in which a driver was designated, the reporter reported to the police that the vehicle of the defendant was to stop the crossing, and reported to the police that the vehicle of the defendant was involved in the accident, and observed the vehicle of the defendant until the police vehicle was raised, and the police vehicle was informed that the driver was a driver at the vehicle of the accident immediately before the error in the driver's name.

The testimony was made in the court of the court below.

The defendant shall not make a statement on his/her personal information or contact information to a person who drives a vehicle while driving a vehicle by asserting that it was the same as that of an accident to another person while driving the vehicle.

Comprehensively taking account of these circumstances, the facts charged that the Defendant driven a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol 0.145% is acknowledged without reasonable doubt.

Unlike legal testimony, the defendant is based on the police division of a reporter.