The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the court below erred in finding the Defendant not guilty of the charges of this case due to misunderstanding of facts, although the alcohol concentration among the blood of the Defendant was sufficiently recognized from 0.136% to 0.076% at the time of driving.

2. Determination

A. On April 26, 2015, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of at least 0.118% among the blood transfusion around 01:50, the Defendant driven Eina car from the front road of the “D” located in Yasan-si C to the front road of the Facheon-dong apartment in the same city.

B. The judgment of the court below is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated at the court below. ① If the above dmark level or the absorption rate in body is charged to the defendant in the most favorable figures, the defendant's maximum blood concentration in 0.068% = 360ml x 0.178 ( alcohol concentration) x 0.7894 ( alcohol concentration) x 0.7 (in body absorption rate) x 0.7 (60cm x 0.86 ( male coefficient) x 10) x 20% from the start of drinking immediately after the start of drinking, the defendant's blood concentration in 0.03% from the start of drinking is presumed to have been reduced by 0.03% from the start of drinking immediately, and the defendant's alcohol concentration in 0% from the blood alcohol level should be presumed to have been presumed to have been reduced to be 0.0% from the start of drinking x 20% from the start of drinking x 20% from the time of drinking (3.0% from the defendant's alcohol level

In full view of the following facts: (i) Considering the dissolution and extinction of alcohol due to the lapse of time, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration pursuant to the above dmark formula cannot be deemed to considerably exceed 0.05%; and (ii) the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is 0.018% of alcohol content in blood.