The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The confession of the defendant in violation of the Postal Evidence Act is merely a mere fact that he/she is presumed to have driven because he/she was unable to memory the situation of the case, and there is no credibility. Among the evidence supporting the facts charged of this case, each statement in the report on the state of driving under the influence of alcohol or the report on internal death is confirmed, and it cannot be viewed as evidence that the defendant directly driven the vehicle of this case, but the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case only by the confession of the defendant. The judgment of the court below

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, community service, 40 hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Whether a confession in the investigative agency or the court of first instance violates the rules of evidence cannot be said to be doubtful of the probative value or credibility of the confession solely on the grounds that the confession in the investigative agency or the court of first instance differs from the statement in the appellate court. In determining the credibility of the confession, the credibility of the confession should be determined in consideration of whether the contents of the confession's statement are objectively rational, what is the motive or reason, what is the motive or reason of the confession, what is the circumstance leading up to the confession, and what is not contrary or contradictory to the confession among other evidence than the confession, and what is the circumstance leading up to the confession. Even if the evidence of the confession is not sufficient to the extent that it can be recognized that the confession is not processed, even if it is not sufficient to acknowledge all or important parts of the crime, it can be said that the confession is not processed, but indirect or circumstantial evidence may be reinforced (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 208Do2343, May 29, 2008; 2015Do5265, Apr. 26, 2019