The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal: mistake of facts and unreasonable sentencing;

A. It is true that the defendant's argument of misunderstanding of facts found that he boomed a boom in a restaurant, so he drank one disease, and drives a two-wheeled automobile after about 40 minutes thereafter.

However, the Defendant drank 2 to 3 illness, which was purchased at convenience stores after stop due to the problem of two-wheeled automobiles, and thereafter, the blood alcohol concentration of the Defendant was 0.187%.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which judged that the defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol is not less than 0.05%, which is the punishment level under the Road Traffic Act at the time of driving a two-wheeled automobile.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the allegation of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument of mistake of facts, that is, each circumstance acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, that is, the police officer, upon receiving a traffic accident report, found the defendant to have tried to build a 5-child on the side of the road and confirmed the fact that the police officer was driving a drinking, and conducted a drinking test, and found that the blood alcohol level was 0.187% as a result of the blood alcohol level measurement. The defendant asserted that the police officer denied the driving at the time of drinking alcohol measurement and conducted a drinking test, but it was not found that the police officer's on-site verification showed that the suspect was drinking, but only the son was found to have opened at the scene (Evidence No. 15, 27, 37, 75, 77 of the evidence record), and the defendant asserted that the 5-child was drinking on the overside of a two-wheeled vehicle in the police station, but the defendant argued that he was drinking at the above 2 or 3-wheeled bar on his own, but the defendant's own assertion that 16-child's own evidence.