The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant, after the completion of driving, misunderstanding of facts, flusium 1 disease in the vehicle and breath alcohol measurement was conducted, the blood alcohol concentration level recognized by the lower court was measured higher than the value at the time of driving.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts.

① The Defendant was found to have driven a breathic act in front of a bridge, and first, measured the breathic measuring instrument after measuring the drafting into a breathic body, thereby making the blood alcohol concentration 0.160%.

At the time of detection, according to the report on the de facto statement of the State-employed driver, the Defendant was able to see the horses, brupted, lusent, and lusent, and the face was red and shocked, and the face was considerably taken out in appearance.

② The Defendant: (a) had a blood alcohol level higher than that of the pulmonary measuring instrument; (b) demanded the police officer to conduct a measurement through blood collection; (c) the Defendant consented to blood collection; and (d) had the Defendant collect blood in an emergency room at the Chungcheong Hospital at the National University. Accordingly, the blood alcohol level measured accordingly was 0.202%.

③ On May 7, 2014, the Defendant stated that he dices alcohol from around 22:00 to 23:30, and otherwise, he dices alcohol in the vehicle after driving.

The claim is not written or written.

At the time of the police investigation, the defendant made a statement before the police officer that he dices alcohol in the vehicle, but argued that this fact is not stated in the protocol only.

However, at the time, the defendant demanded the police officer to collect blood with good body as a result of the pulmonary measurement, while the above protocol is written without raising any objection, and the defendant puts his signature on it.