All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds of violation of Article 148-2(2)2 of the Road Traffic Act, on the ground that there is insufficient proof that the Defendant driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol above 0.1% of blood alcohol level.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the recognition of blood alcohol concentration in the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

2. On the grounds of appeal by the defendant, the court below found the defendant guilty of the violation of Article 148-2 (2) 2 of the Road Traffic Act and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, since it is insufficient to prove that the defendant driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol above 0.1% of blood alcohol level, but considering that he driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol above 0.05% of blood alcohol level, among the facts charged in this case, the part concerning the violation of Article 148-2 (2) 2 of the Road Traffic Act and the violation

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the specification of facts charged

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.