The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the Defendant’s speech and behavior immediately after the discovery of the instant case, the Defendant’s statement following the police interrogation protocol against the Defendant, the result of measurement of alcohol concentration in blood, etc., based on the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts), it is evident that the Defendant driven under the influence of alcohol with not less than 0.05% alcohol concentration in blood.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. On May 24, 2015, the Defendant driven a G low-income vehicle in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 3 km from the front of the D cafeteria located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si to the front of the “Felto” road located in Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu.

3. The lower court found that the Defendant’s blood collection density was not measured by 0.051% as a result of the measurement of alcohol level at around 03:59, on a personal basis, after driving about about 3 03:27 meters of alcohol, and driving around the above “Fel”; at around 03:40, at the time when the Defendant’s speech and walking condition was controlled by driving to police officers, the Defendant had good eye and walked; at around 03:59, the Defendant measured the blood alcohol concentration at around 0.051%; the Defendant’s blood collection concentration was not measured by blood collection because he did not request blood measurement; however, there was a difference for each individual, but the blood alcohol concentration between 30:9 and 90 minutes after drinking reached the highest alcohol level, and thereafter, it appears that the Defendant’s blood concentration was lower than the average blood concentration at the time of driving on the basis of 0.08% or 0.3% of alcohol control over each hour after drinking.