The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the defendant's behavior at the time of a misunderstanding of facts, the initial drinking time and the time interval between driving hours, etc., even if the result of the first alcohol alcohol measurement is based, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby not guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, two hundred hours of community service order, and forty hours of attending order) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts cannot determine whether the blood alcohol concentration at the time of drinking driving belongs to the country where the blood alcohol concentration at the highest level is rising or belongs to the country where the blood alcohol concentration at the highest level reaches the highest level. Rather, in a case where the blood alcohol concentration at the country where the blood alcohol concentration is likely to increase after a considerable time after the blood alcohol concentration at the time of drinking driving, only the part concerning decomposition extinguishment after the elapse of time (Hmark 2 Form) in the so-called Redmark, based on the blood alcohol concentration measured after a considerable time from the time of drinking driving, cannot be determined by applying the blood alcohol concentration at the time of drinking driving (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Du15035, Jan. 11, 207; 2006Du15035, Jan. 11, 2007). According to general scientific view, the blood alcohol concentration at the time of drinking increase by 10% after the blood alcohol concentration at the highest rate of 0% to 30% of alcohol or 0% of alcohol.