The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the measurement of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles was conducted based on illegal arrest of flagrant offenders, the result of measurement of drinking is an illegally collected evidence and cannot be used as evidence of guilt.

The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles since the judgment of conviction was pronounced as evidence of guilt.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (hereinafter referred to as a fine of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of ex officio determination, the Defendant, at the Daegu District Court on October 15, 2014, may recognize the fact that the judgment became final and conclusive on October 23, 2014, by having been sentenced to three years of suspension of execution for two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective action, a deadly weapon, etc.) (a).

Since the crime of this case is related to the crime subject to the above final judgment and the crime subject to the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the statutes of the lower judgment was omitted, the reason for ex

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. The Defendant, at the lower court, led to the confession of the facts charged in the instant case that he had driven under the influence of 0.156% alcohol concentration in blood alcohol.

It is sufficient to reinforce the confession with the remaining evidence other than the blood alcohol concentration appraisal statement, such as the statement in the traffic accident report.

The court below is just in finding the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, and there is no illegality affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Furthermore, I examine the admissibility of the blood alcohol concentration appraisal report.

The drinking driving is under influence of alcohol.