At around 21:40 on January 24, 2013, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license, driven C vehicles at a section of approximately 100 meters from the front road of the head of Si/Gu, in the form of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.187%. The Defendant driven C vehicles at a section of about 100 meters from the front road of the head of Si/Gun/Gu to the front road of the head of Si/Gun/Gu.

2. We examine the date and time stated in the above facts charged and whether the Defendant driven C vehicle at the place.

According to the statement of D, following the occurrence of an accident between D driver and C vehicle, D and the Defendant may recognize that there was a dispute over the liability of the accident, and D did not regard that a person other than the Defendant was discharged from the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle.

However, according to the records of this case, considering the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s assertion from the police to the police’s examination as the suspect was driven by an acting engineer at the time from the time to the present court; (b) the period of 20 to 30 seconds after the contact accident occurred; and (c) the Defendant appeared at a place where approximately 50 meters away from the accident site; and (d) the Defendant did not regard the Defendant as the driver’s seat; (b) the evidence examined in this case and the circumstances acknowledged earlier are insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged of this case; and (c) there

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the court acquitted the defendant under the latter part of Article 325