The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On September 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) while under the influence of alcohol with blood alcohol content of 0.127% at around 01:05 on September 23, 2014, the Defendant was driving a dives and backward-in car (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) at the front sidewalk of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) over about 20 centimeters.

2. Determination

A. In light of the original function of the vehicle and the legislative intent of the Road Traffic Act, in order to use the vehicle in the course of parking in accordance with its original method of use, it is not enough to start the engine and complete so-called launching manipulations.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da30834 delivered on Nov. 12, 199, etc.). The term "driving" under Article 2 subparagraph 26 of the Road Traffic Act means using a vehicle on a road (in the case of a drunk driving, including places other than the road) according to its original use. The concept of driving as mentioned above includes a purpose element in light of the content of the provision. Thus, since the concept of driving as mentioned above includes a purpose element, it means only intentional driving, and it does not constitute driving in the case of a vehicle moving while without any intention or involvement of a person in the vehicle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do1109 delivered on Apr. 23, 2004).

The defendant asserts that from the drinking control point to the point of view, the defendant consistently used the movement of the vehicle, and did not have driven a substitute engineer, and that the vehicle was a substitute engineer because the trial operation of the vehicle in this case was not well seen, and that he was a substitute engineer in advance to return the substitute engineer if he did not walked.

C. We examine the following facts: (a) the witness E’s legal statement; (b) the witness F’s partial statement; (c) the police interrogation protocol against the Defendant; (b) the police protocol against the Defendant; (c) the police statement of the Defendant; (d) the on-site photograph; (c) the monetary statement; and (d) the receipt of the call submitted by the Defendant.