The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Meritorious of the legal principle that the defendant added an acting engineer

When refusing a demand for payment, an acting engineer was carrying a vehicle at the center of the road, and the defendant is driving a vehicle to avoid the risk of an accident with other vehicles, which constitutes an emergency evacuation.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, found the allegation of emergency evacuation, was inevitable to drive a vehicle in order to avoid interference with traffic by a survey agent, as he/she left the vehicle at the center of the road.

Even in light of the fact that the Defendant was driving a vehicle on the right side, rather than stopping the vehicle on the right side, but driving a considerable distance, the Defendant was hiding the Defendant until the Defendant was found along with the police officer, and the Defendant was a new substitute engineer for the vehicle again, but the time was considered to be around November 28, 2015, when considering the fact that the Defendant’s driving of the vehicle was deemed to have been done to move the vehicle after the police officer’s control, it cannot be deemed as an emergency evacuation because it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant’s driving of the vehicle was conducted to avoid the risk of an accident with other vehicles.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of legal principles is without merit.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s mistake of drinking driving is recognized and divided.

The blood alcohol concentration level of the defendant is low, and the driving distance is also driving.

Additional도요

(2) The amount of money to be paid to the agent who demanded the money.

There are circumstances to consider the circumstances leading to the instant crime.

However, not only five times the defendant was punished for drinking driving, but also the case.