The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around November 4, 2017, the Defendant: (a) driven a C driver’s vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of at least 0.060% of alcohol while under the influence of alcohol at a section of about 1km from the flusium to the same flusium from the flusium to the same flusium from the flusium to the flusium.

2. The judgment : (i) the Defendant alleged that he/she has her drinking three alcohol until November 4, 2017; (ii) there is no evidence to view the Defendant’s final drinking point differently; and (iii) when the Defendant applied the final drinking point claimed by the Defendant, the Defendant’s final driving (21:35 on the same day) and the alcohol measurement (21:38 on the same day) increase in the alcohol concentration in the blood during his/her blood (if there is a difference for each individual, but the blood alcohol concentration in the blood between 30 minutes through 90 minutes after drinking has reached the highest value and thereafter, it is generally known that he/she has her average 0.08% or 0.03% (0.05%) per hour after drinking.

In full view of the fact that it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s respiratory results as 0.060%, and the Defendant’s respiratory results only exceeded 0.05%, which is the rule of punishment, as well as the fact that the Defendant’s investigation report (the state of speech and behavior: the state of speech and behavior: the state of walking, the state of walking: a little string, and the driver’s blood color: the state of walking: the state of walking: the state of walking, the state of walking: the state of eye, and the driver’s blood: the state of snowing) is difficult to accurately understand the degree of under the influence of alcohol at the time of driving, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was 0.060% or 0.05% or more at the time of

It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered after the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the summary of the judgment of innocence is not publicly announced pursuant to the proviso of Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.