The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding 1) On July 10, 2016, the Defendant’s statement on the quantity of the drinking alcohol is not reliable, such as the Defendant’s statement on the quantity of the drinking alcohol is not consistent, and the Defendant’s additional amount of the drinking alcohol after completing driving in light of the field photographs at the time of detection, the police officer I’s statement made at the scene, etc., which was conducted at the time of detection. On the day of the instant case, the Defendant’s blood alcohol level of 0.212% measured at around 08:27, the Defendant’s blood alcohol level of 0.05% exceeds the punishment base value. According to the prime driver’s statement, the Defendant’s statement on the drinking alcohol level at the time of the alcohol measurement, the Defendant’s speech was divided, walked, and the blood color was deculed, and the Defendant was found not guilty of the facts charged. Accordingly, the lower court erred in the misapprehension of facts as to the Defendant’s statement on the charges of the Child Welfare Act.

3) At the time of the instant case on violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the fact that the Defendant driven the Oral Ba as stated in this part of the facts charged is recognized, and since it was not possible to subscribe to mandatory insurance at the beginning because there was no registration number plate of the above Oral Ba, there is evidence of reinforcement of this part of the facts charged in addition to the Defendant’s confession. Therefore, the lower court that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in matters of mistake of facts.