The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case, which the court below acquitted, is as follows.

On January 25, 2016, the Defendant, at around 01:48, driven the said vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.148% by inserting the steering wheel of the EM5 passenger car (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) with the front wheels of the EM5 passenger car (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”) on the street of “D,” located in the Da, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, U.S., and undergoing X-cella, thereby driving the said vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.148%.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds of lack of evidence as to the facts charged in the instant case in the following purport.

The recognition of facts constituting a crime in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to confluence to a reasonable doubt. As such, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not reach the extent of causing such conviction, the determination should be made in the interests of the defendant even though he/she is suspected of conviction, such as contradictory to the defendant’s assertion or defense or uncomfortable dismissal (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do231, Jun. 28, 2012). Meanwhile, “driving” under the Road Traffic Act refers to using the horse on the road in accordance with its own proper method of use (including operation).

In doing so, the following circumstances, such as the witness F’s legal statement, revealed by the record of the instant case, namely, it is difficult for the Defendant to eliminate the possibility of scam by scam because the Defendant scam in the driver’s seat of the instant vehicle under the influence of alcohol at the time and place indicated in the facts charged. In light of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone, the evidence alone, which was proven without reasonable doubt as to the Defendant’s driving of the instant vehicle under the influence of alcohol at the time and place

It is difficult to see otherwise.