The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not make a report or telephone informing of the driving of drinking alcohol at the time, but it did not constitute a false report because it was called out to the purport that the Defendant had a situation where the Defendant had experienced prior to the time, and then had a talked about the situation divided.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found guilty of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, the Defendant was a vehicle driving at around 01:17, Apr. 12, 2017, with the phone called at around 112, 2017, and “Tcheon-ro Apartment 732, a vehicle driving in front of 732.

The vehicle number is H, and at present, stated to the effect that the vehicle is stopping, ② the Defendant was asked to the police officer I and C to the effect that the Defendant was “her own person,” and the Defendant was asked to see that the Defendant was a person driving on the spot and drinking. In that time, the Defendant’s control was over the dwarfed at this time.

It is acknowledged that the police officer carried out a cross-rupture, such as “the fact that the police officer carried out a cross-rupture, ③ the police officer carried out a vehicle reported, but did not scam for driving, and returned to the police station after returning to the police station. ④ The police officer pointed out that the police officer’s “in the absence of a person driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, the person driving a vehicle without the influence of alcohol is a false report,” and confirmed the contents of the police officer’s non-rupture

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant, who re-entered the situation similar to that of his control before making a false report to the police, and tried to make a subsequent reply after examining whether the police officer dispatched to the police control by drinking. This act did not constitute a crime of drinking driving, and thus, constitutes a crime of violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, since the defendant made a false report to the public official even though he

At the time of reporting, the Defendant “driving” is deemed to be a person.