beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant: (a) tried to sleep on a car; (b) intending to drive the air-conditioner; (c) she was in the state of construction of the automobile; (d) she was in the state of construction of the automobile, which led to the driving of the automobile in the state of operation (D); (d) she was in the state of operation of the automobile by cutting down the engine by driving the car; and (d) her street was shocked; and (e) even if the Defendant was not driving, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charges on the ground that she was driving in the state of drinking, thereby adversely affecting
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant left a neutral state by leaving parking at the entrance of a building parking lot, and the Defendant asserted that the vehicle was frightened by a fluoring misshing the fluor, but was merely stated to the effect that the vehicle was fluored by a fluoring the fluor at the time of the initial police investigation but did not properly memory it at the time of the initial police investigation.
(Evidence Records 19 pages) At the time the police officer discovered the instant vehicle, the front wheels on the road, while the front wheels on the right side of the vehicle was facing the direction of the vehicle to the right side by rhyming the right side from the road to the right side by the front part of the road, while the vehicle of the defendant seems to have proceeded toward the delivery of the vehicle on the road. Rather, if the vehicle was parked on the road, it would be common to park on the side of the upper side of the road, and parking on the part that is not connected to the parking lot of the building. ② At the time the police officer discovered the instant vehicle, the defendant expected to take the front side of the vehicle or was locked with the face of the hand.