The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is as follows: ① The defendant caused an accident while driving a motor vehicle without obtaining a driver’s license by drinking the motor vehicle; however, the police investigation subsequently conducted the police investigation, and the defendant made a false statement that he/she has taken the drinking by expanding the amount of drinking alcohol to the level of 0.074%, and that he/she has taken the drinking alcohol at the time of drinking alcohol level to 0.074%.

The defendant cannot be seen, and the above dmark formula should be applied again on the basis of the correct amount of drinking, but the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and 2) even if not, the court below's sentence that sentenced the defendant to 6 months of imprisonment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant made a confession of all the facts charged at the third trial date of the original trial on the date of the original trial. Unless there are special circumstances to suspect the credibility of the confession as being made in the presence of counsel in the presence of a judge who has guaranteed objectivity and fairness in accordance with the relevant statutes, the mere reason that the confession differs from the legal statement in the appellate trial, which is the appellate trial, is not sufficient to doubt the probative value or credibility of the confession.

Thus, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the confession of the defendant, etc., there was a strict proof of alcohol, alcohol level, alcohol time, and body body, which are the premise for applying the aforementioned dmark formula, in the case of which the defendant's blood or pulmonary sample was not a case where the degree of alcohol level can be measured by examining the defendant's blood or pulmonary sample immediately after driving his alcohol.

It should be seen that the defendant's drinking volume is based on his own drinking volume, etc., and when based on the above dmark formula, the depositee is the most favorable to the defendant.