The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In so long as the escape of a defendant is merely an extension of his own self-defense and his self-help is not an illegal act that meets the requirements for the composition of a crime, he cannot be punished.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of aiding and abetting an offender.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing (two-month imprisonment, two-year suspension of execution, and forty-hour course of compliance driving) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of legal principles, the defendant's act of having another person make a false confession on behalf of himself/herself to commit the crime of aiding and abetting a criminal defendant through abuse of his/her right of defense constitutes the crime of aiding and abetting a criminal defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do20, Mar. 24, 200). 2) In light of such legal principles and evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is recognized that the defendant requested the co-defendant B, not the defendant, of the court below prior to the day when he/she is examined of the police, to make him/her make a false confession that he/she had driven the instant vehicle. Thus, this part

B. As to the assertion on unreasonable sentencing, the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he had the record of punishment twice for drunk driving, and the blood alcohol concentration is high to 0.213%, and the nature of the crime is not somewhat weak in that he committed the crime by having friendly B make a false statement to an investigation agency to conceal the crime of drunk driving, thereby inducing an offender to commit the crime. However, the Defendant is deemed to have no record of criminal punishment other than the above two criminal records, and the act of aiding and abetting the offender is deemed to have been contingent, and the Defendant is deemed not to repeat the crime in violation of the depth and depth of the instant crime, and the Defendant has faithfully become a member of the workplace for aviation around 198.