The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the defendant has taken alcohol at the time of driving because he/she has taken alcohol more than two hours in a considerable amount, and it is reasonable to have taken alcohol level at the time of driving, and the correction is made so that the amount of measuring the alcohol level is low, the defendant may fully recognize the fact that he/she has driven alcohol;

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court determined that: (a) the Defendant’s final drinking time is around 20:25% on March 31, 2017; (b) the same date was 21:05 on the same day; and (c) the respiratory measurement was conducted around 21:22 on the same day; thus, the possibility of rise cannot be ruled out in a section where it is impossible to determine whether the level of alcohol level between the driving time and the respiratory measurement time is the rise point; (d) it is impossible to determine how the symptoms value at the time of the respiratory measurement after the driving becomes possible; (b) the Defendant’s respiratory measurement is 0.05% higher than the upper limit of 0.05%, which is the standard for punishment for drinking; and (e) the Defendant’s respiratory measurement is made in excess of the upper limit of 0.57% on the actual blood level, such as the result of inquiry about the Plaintiff’s trade, and (e) the Defendant’s statement stating that “the Defendant’s blood level is 0.5% of alcohol level” in light of evidence.

For the reasons that it is difficult to see that the defendant was acquitted.

B. The facts charged in a criminal trial for a trial of a party deliberation are proved by the prosecutor, and the judge is true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.