The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. On August 29, 2014, the Defendant: (a) driven Dex 50 meters from the port of Yang Jae-dong, Seocho-gu, Seoul to the front of the same Gu, while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.232% in blood at around 23:14 on August 29, 2014.

B. In consideration of the following circumstances, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was not proven to the extent that the facts charged in the instant case were not reasonable doubtable.

① According to the witness F’s legal statement and the statement of the occurrence and inspection report of the case, even if the Defendant arrived at the vicinity of the house by using his/her substitute driving as alleged by the Defendant, there is a doubt as to whether he/she is not directly driving 50 meters in order to park in front of the house thereafter.

(2) However, G which was reported by the Defendant due to drinking alcohol driving due to trial costs with the Defendant at the time, any H in whose case the Defendant was designated as an acting driver was not present and made a statement.

3. The above evidence alone does not prove that the defendant was driving at the time.

2. The facts charged shall be proved with the increase in the submission of the prosecutor, in accordance with the detailed and mutually consistent contents of the statement by the persons involved in the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts).

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. It is natural that the recognition of conviction in a judgment of conviction is based on evidence that leads a judge to have such conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant was driving alcohol at the time and place specified in the facts charged.

(1) At the time of the instant case, FF officers are called to the scene where the Defendant’s vehicle was parked after receiving a report on drinking driving.