The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding/legal scenarios), the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, despite the erroneous determination of facts, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, on the grounds that the defendant was found not guilty of the facts charged of this case, even though he was found not guilty of the facts charged of this case, when he was placed in the state of 0.128% of blood alcohol concentration at the time of this case while he was under the influence of 0.128% under the influence of alcohol and proceeded without the X-celler (D) while driving in the state of EX.

2. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to fully reach the extent that the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as where the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.

(대법원 2011. 4. 28. 선고 2010도14487 판결 등 참조). 원심은, 기록에 나타난 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① 원심의 현장검증결괄에 따르면, 이 사건 승용차를 기어 중립(N)으로 세워 놓고 관찰한 결과 10m정도 차량이 움직인 사실이 인정된 점, ② 피해차량의 운전자인 원심증인 E이 피고인이 이 사건 차량을 운전한 것이 아니라 바퀴가 굴러서 충돌하게 된 것 같다는 취지의 원심 법정진술, ③ 이 사건 발생 당시 경찰관이던 원심증인 F은 피고인이 잠들어 있어 자신이 이 사건 승용차의 시동을 껐는데 그 당시에 기어가 드라이브(D) 위치에 있지 않았다는 취지의 진술을 한 점 등을 종합하여 볼 때, 피고인이 이 사건 차량을 운전하였다

This case's vehicle is parked rather than that of the flag.