The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor’s summary of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the Defendant driven a vehicle in a state of drinking alcohol level exceeding 0.05% can be sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not guilty verdict of the facts charged of this case erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the facts.

2. An ex officio determination prosecutor made an application for permission to amend an Act of Amendment to the Road Traffic Act to “Article 148-2(2)2 of the Road Traffic Act” in the applicable law to “Article 148-2(2)3 of the Road Traffic Act” as “Article 148-2(2) of the Road Traffic Act” in the instant facts charged as “0.11% of blood alcohol concentration” in the instant facts charged, and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it was changed by granting permission.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

According to the result of the lower court’s CCTV viewing on July 18, 2013, the Defendant’s 17:20 on the day of the instant case, following the Defendant’s 17:20 on the day of the instant case, it is confirmed that the Defendant flown the instant restaurant at around 18:46 after drinking alcohol. As such, the Defendant’s driving time seems to be more than 18:46.

Unlike the facts charged with this part of the facts charged, it is not deemed that there is a substantial disadvantage in exercising the defendant's right of defense, and therefore, the time of crime is recognized as above.

While under the influence of alcohol leveling not less than 0.05%, C rocketing car was driven by approximately one kilometer from around F cafeterias in Daegu Dong-gu to the same Gagra in front of the E Post Office located in Daegu Dong-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the statement by the defendant at the original court

1. The testimony of each court below by the witness H, I, and J

1. Reports on detection of suspects in violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and reports on the driving of drivers;