The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On April 28, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 21:25, the Defendant driven a C motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content of about 0.063% from the section of approximately 2 km from the front side of the Puan apartment apartment located in the Puan-si Seori-si, Puju to the front side of the cafeteriaan-gun located in the same Ri, thereby driving the C motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content.

2. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion was that the Defendant was driving as stated in the facts charged but did not drink at the time of driving. After driving, the Defendant was in a state of not drinking, and there was only such values as above in response to a drinking measurement after drinking after drinking at a nearby store after driving.

3. The evidence that corresponds to the above facts charged in the judgment lies in each of the statements in the investigation agencies of D (Evidence Nos. 4, 10 of the evidence list Nos. 4, 10 of the above facts charged) but it is difficult to believe as it is in light of the statements in D in this court that "the defendant showed to come from the opposite side, and the vehicle did not seem to move from the opposite side", and each of the statements in D's statements in this court and investigation agencies of E are insufficient to recognize the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge them.

(M) In light of F’s legal statement, the Defendant appears not to drink until he parks the above vehicle in the vicinity of the said cafeteria. Therefore, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of a crime, and thus, the Defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.