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 summary of the grounds for appeal showed that the defendant's blood alcohol concentration in around 22:02 at the driving time was risen when considering drinking time;

It shall not be readily concluded.

Even if at the above time the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was risen

In light of the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at around 22:45, which was 43 minutes after driving, was measured by 0.051% which greatly exceeds 0.03% which is the standard value for punishment, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving was 0.03% or more.

It is reasonable to view it.

Nevertheless, it was proved that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration exceeded the punishment standards.

There is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court below which acquitted on the ground that it cannot be seen

2. In addition to the existing facts charged in the trial of the court, the prosecutor of the judgment ex officio applied for the amendment of the indictment with the following [the reasons for the judgment to be used again] added the facts charged as a selective addition to the facts charged as a "criminal fact", and since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

Even if there are such reasons for ex officio reversal, the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake and misapprehension of the legal principles on the above facts is still meaningful as it is related to the criminal facts under the court’s conviction.

3. Determination as to the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The lower court’s judgment: (a) it is unclear that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of his/her respiratory measurement cannot be recognized as the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of his/her driving; and (b) it is likely that the Defendant’s blood concentration at the time of his/her driving led to an increase in the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of his/her driving; (c) however, in light of the fact that the Defendant’s blood concentration at the time of his/her driving increased between 30 minutes and 90 minutes after his/her final drinking, there is a possibility that the Defendant’s blood concentration at the time of his/her driving