1. The finding of guilt in a criminal trial has no room for a judge to make a reasonable doubt;

evidence with probative value sufficient to make sure that the facts charged are true.

the defendant is guilty if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction.

Even if there is doubt, the interest of the defendant shall be judged by the interest of the defendant, but such in-depth proof shall be half

be formed by direct evidence, not by direct evidence, but by violation of the rules of experience and logic.

not by indirect evidence, but by indirect evidence, the indirect evidence is individually produced;

aggregate of all evidence in connection with each other even if it does not have full probative value as to a crime;

In the case of consideration, it is judged that there is a comprehensive probative value not independent.

In such a case, criminal facts may also be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do35, Nov. 27, 2001).

4392 see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 4392

2. A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: The Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration around January 25, 2015 around 03:41.

0,092% of the 0,092% on the front road of the E-cafeteria located in Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu.

Until now, one has driven his own launa car from the street.

B. As to the above facts charged, the Defendant was drinking the company fees and alcohol after drinking.

The agency driver asked for the agency driver, and there is a dispute over the agency driver and the expenses in the vehicle.

agent drives a vehicle in the original parking area by 5m or more, and leaves the vehicle in such state;

After that, she was laid off, she only sleep from the chief to the driver's seat, and so she is sleep.

Recognizing that there is no operation.

C. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court, based on the evidence adopted by the first instance court, crackdown on drinking driving.

At the time, the defendant was unlocked at the car driver's seat, and the time and headlight of the car turn on the car.

The Defendant was at the location of the divers (D) under the state of putcock;

A vehicle parked in front of a person's car and a driver who was parked close to the point of contact with each other.

Recognizing the fact that the Defendant was measured with the blood alcohol concentration of 0.088% as a result of the alcohol alcohol measurement for the Defendant

Then, in light of these facts, the meaning of whether the defendant is not a person driving after drinking alcohol.

In the premise that the trial is in fact, but the defendant denies the driving.

on the sole basis of the above recognition that there is no evidence to prove that the defendant has driven a car.

On the ground that the first instance court reversed the conviction and acquitted the defendant.

3. However, the following facts can be known by the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court and the lower court:

In other words, the defendant's vehicle at the time of control : ① The defendant's vehicle was on the starting and headlights, and Radra

the fact that was located in B(D) and was almost adjacent to other vehicles parked on the side, etc.

From the perspective, it is obvious that any group that she has driven and moved the Defendant’s vehicle to the point of control (PP)

We do not dispute this point, but we do not dispute this point. However, while a substitute engineer is driving, the vehicle is in the same state as above.

(2) The details of reports received by the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency 112 General Situation Room

According to the report, at around 03:38, 03:39, and 03:44, the report was received at least three times, and the contents thereof were maternity.

Second, the purport of "undermining traffic accidents without causing people to stop," is that such a report is made in such a manner.

In light of the common sense, the defendant's assertion that the substitute engineer left the match while driving the vehicle.

It appears that it is not true, and ③ the front wheeler side of the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of control.

Cogn's name, starting from the part to the front, rear wheeler's upper part.

D. The extent that the police officer was flicker and the police officer was flicker when he was flicker, and the police officer was flicker.

It seems that the time after the promotion accident has long been long, and in this respect, the above 112 Declarations have been reported.

(4) In a field investigation conducted after the control framework, the police officer appears to correspond to this section.

The Defendant was informed of the location of the control, but the Defendant was not accurately aware of the original parking location;

The flag of drinking and the next generation of drinking were not identified as the approximate location of the singing room.

and directly enter the Jnooper, stating that he is the same as the Jnooper in front of the control point.

The defendant's vehicle at the time of crackdown is not the length of the side but the center of the two-lane road.

On the side, while parking by rhythm, the front wheeler of the Defendant vehicle and the second side of the two-lane road;

The latter part of the driver's seat of other vehicles parked in contact with it, and the latter part of the vehicle was in contact with it.

A. At the location of the D. D., put put in place and put in place put in place is discovered, and the fees of the agent are collected.

It is true that even if vagabonds were punished, vehicles are installed and placed in the above condition.

It is very exceptional, and it is required that the defendant resist or properly park the vehicle.

In full view of the circumstances such as the absence of circumstances, a proxy engineer as alleged by the defendant.

In addition to driving, it is sufficient for the defendant to drive a drinking motor vehicle directly as stated in the above charges.

may be subject to prosecution.

Nevertheless, the court below determined that the defendant was driving a vehicle for the reasons stated in its reasoning.

The judgment of not guilty of the above facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to do so is against logical and empirical rules.

The court below erred by exceeding the limit of the principle of stimulism, which affected the judgment.

4. Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be tried and judged again by the court below.

The case is remanded to the lower court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Young-young

Chief Justice Kim Jong-il

Justices Kim Jae-in