The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error 1) On the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) in consideration of the damaged parts of the vehicle and the on-site photographs of the vehicle or the statements made by the victim E, the fact that the victim was injured under the Criminal Act at the time of the instant accident can be acknowledged. 2) Since the Defendant stated at the first investigative agency that he was drinking alcohol at the time of the instant accident at the time of the instant accident, the Defendant could recognize the fact that he driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.063% at the time of the instant accident.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of 1.5 million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The burden of proving the facts charged in a general criminal trial is imposed on the prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence with probative value, which makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt about the defendant's guilt, it shall be determined as the defendant's interest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4737, Feb. 24, 2006). 2) This part of the facts charged against the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by the Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4737, Feb. 24, 2006). E, the victim of the instant accident, was present at the court of the original trial and was issued a written diagnosis by the police station that he was receiving a defect, "I have been issued a medical certificate by the hospital", and "I have no serious obstacle to daily life," or for a long time.

In this regard, it is also time that sacrifies, shoulders, trees, etc. are assembled or copied even in the ordinary world.