The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was that the Defendant used the oral administration immediately before the measurement of alcohol, and thus, the blood alcohol concentration measured at that time cannot be recognized. Rather, the result of the examination conducted by the Defendant in the manner of collecting blood from the Japanese White Hospital on the same day at the fourth anniversary of the new wall of the same day was measured by 0.011% of the blood alcohol concentration of the Defendant.

In addition, the police officer in charge at the time of the measurement of alcohol did not notify the defendant of the explanation about the collection of blood, and there is no fact that the defendant has signed the report on the situation of the drinking driver.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the facts charged in this case as evidence, which was forged or not reliable, and which found the result of the drinking driving control as evidence, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In the case of the measurement by the relevant pulmonology, there is a problem of accuracy and reliability of the measurement result based on the condition of the measuring instrument, measuring method, degree of cooperation of the other party, etc. Thus, barring any special circumstance that makes it difficult to believe the result of the measurement by blood gathering, such as artificial manipulation or the involvement of the person concerned in the process of blood collection or examination, it is in accord with the empirical rule to regard the blood testing as a blood alcohol measurement method close to the blood alcohol concentration at the time of the measurement than the pulmonology by the pulmonology.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do6905 Decided February 13, 2004; 2013Do6285 Decided October 24, 2013, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2013Do6285, Oct. 24, 201

Judgment

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record: (a) around 00:32 March 5, 2014, the Defendant was subject to a breathem measurement by means of a breathm measurement method on the front side of the “a regardless of whether a church,” located in 752 Goyang-dong, Goyang-si; (b) as a result, the Defendant’s blood alcohol content was measured by 0.142%; (c) but (d) more than four hours thereafter, the Defendant spent her blood alcohol content to the Gansan Hospital at the Incheon National University and 04:10 on the same day.