The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Although the Defendant was a “motor vehicle driver” at the time, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant was not a driver.

Judgment

The evidence that there is a crime in criminal procedure must be presented by the prosecutor, and the criminal facts must be proven by the judge to have high probability without reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a high probability, the defendant is suspected to be guilty even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

As pointed out by the prosecutor, there is a lack of rationality in the defendant's statement or behavior, and at the time of detection, the defendant wears a safety labelling boat at the driver's seat while driving the motor vehicle in this case at the center of the road, and the right launchings on the brake, etc. are suspected of being not the driver.

However, it is difficult to conclude that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the Defendant was a driver of a vehicle at the time, as stated by the court below, that the I testimony as H or an acting engineer of the Defendant, as stated by the court below, was consistent with the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant was not driving at the time.

Therefore, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts charged.

In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.