The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. On April 26, 2015, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of at least 0.118 percent of alcohol during blood transfusion around 01:50, the Defendant driven Eina car from the front day of the “D” in Ysan-si C to the front day of the Facheon-dong apartment site located in the same city at the same time.

2. Determination

A. Based on the Defendant’s statement, etc., the investigative agency applying the aforementioned dmark formula presumed that the Defendant was drinking 60 km in body with the Defendant before the Defendant 1st 1841% [ = 360ml x 0.175ml x 0.794 ( alcohol content) x 60ml x 0.8 ( male coefficient) x 10mn x 10m alcohol level at the time of the Defendant’s driving.

B. In the case of a driver's blood or pulmonary sample immediately after driving, and for the measurement of alcohol level at the time of driving, the blood level can be presumed as the result of calculating the blood level using the so-called dmark formula, unless it is possible to measure the blood level at the time of driving. However, in the case of the use of scientific and other empirical rules to identify the existence of the elements of crime, individual and specific facts, which are the premise for the application of the rule of law, should be proved. In the case of the above dmark formula, it is necessary to examine the quantity, time, body weight, etc. of alcohol taken in and used as materials for the application of the rule of law (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do128, Jun. 27, 200). Furthermore, it is necessary to provide strict proof in order to recognize such premise (see Supreme Court Decision 99Do128, Jun. 27, 200).