我国醉驾入刑十余年，取得了显著的治理成效，但立法轻罪化倾向也逐渐暴露出刑案数量激增、司法资源浪费等次生风险，充分适用相对不起诉和扩大适用附条件不起诉进行出罪是解决当前醉驾治理困境的有效路径。本文结合我国刑事司法政策和醉驾司法实践，对醉驾案件不起诉制度的适用和完善进行分析研究。首先，对醉驾案件的主体特征、入罪与出罪的治理模式、定罪标准和立法现状进行了梳理，认为醉驾入罪需投入大量司法资源但治理效果却不尽人意，难与社会治理要求相协调，应在入罪基础上探索和优化醉驾案件出罪化处理的新思路。其次，分析醉驾案件司法现状，醉驾入刑会带来附随后果严重、定罪量刑不均衡、罪犯“交叉感染”、行政与刑事处罚衔接不畅等不良效果，当前的解决手段为入罪后从宽量刑的适用和醉驾出罪不起诉制度的适用。并结合“认罪认罚从宽”“逮捕羁押与起诉”“司法非刑罪化”对我国醉驾案件的刑事司法走向进行分析。本文认为不起诉制度的适用应主要从案件事实是否符合法律规定、犯罪嫌疑人自身情况、法益危害性和法益修复情况三方面进行考量。强调醉驾相对不起诉制度的适用应通过综合考量醉酒驾车的判定标准，实现对轻微醉驾行为的出罪处理。这一方面可以节约司法资源、避免刑罚溢出效应、针对性治理醉驾行为，另一方面也能与认罪认罚从宽制度相连接，切实贯彻审慎进行逮捕羁押和起诉的刑事司法理念，在法治体系下实现醉驾治理。最后，结合我国当前的司法实践和司法解释，从醉驾案件不起诉制度司法标准不统一、适用不足、两种不起诉制度的冲突、适用后缺少对醉驾行为的惩处、监督救济机制不足五个方面进行了反思性审视。在此基础上，提出针对我国醉驾案件不起诉制度的完善建议：第一，制定统一的司法解释。第二，规范相对不起诉制度的适用，从起诉必要性审查、建立适用标准、释放认罪认罚从宽效能三个层次循序推进。第三，扩大附条件不起诉制度的适用，借鉴实践中的隐性存在，在未来立法修法时明确将附条件不起诉制度适用于醉驾案件，以认罪认罚为前提，设置明确的适用条件，增设考察制度。第四，区分相对不起诉与附条件不起诉的适用情形。第五，实现不起诉制度与行政处罚的衔接。第六，从建立听证制度、推行申请适用模式、畅通救济途径三个方面完善不起诉制度的监督和救济机制。

The criminalization of drunk driving in China has been in force for more than ten years and has achieved remarkable results.However, the tendency of misdemeanor legislation has also gradually exposed the secondary risks such as the proliferation of criminal cases and the waste of judicial resources. The full application of relative non-prosecution and the expanded application of conditional non-prosecution for exoneration is an effective path to solve the current drunk driving governance dilemma.This paper adopts the literature analysis method, case analysis method, value analysis method and other research methods, combined with China‘s criminal justice policy and drunk driving judicial practice, the application and improvement of the drunk driving case non-prosecution system to analyze and research.Firstly, the characteristics of the subjects of drunk driving cases, the governance modes of criminalization and decriminalization, the conviction standards and the current status of legislation are sorted out, and it is argued that the criminalization of drunk driving requires a large amount of judicial resources but the governance effect is unsatisfactory and difficult to coordinate with the requirements of social governance, and the new idea of decriminalization of drunk driving cases should be explored and optimized on the basis of criminalization.Secondly, we analyze the current judicial situation of drunk driving cases. The criminalization of drunk driving will bring serious collateral consequences, unbalanced conviction and sentencing, "cross-infection" of offenders, and poor connection between administrative and criminal punishment. The current solution is the application of lenient sentencing after conviction and the application of the non-indictment system for drunk driving. This article believes that the application of the non-prosecution system should be mainly from the facts of the case in accordance with the provisions of the law, the suspect‘s own situation, the harm of legal interests and legal interests to repair the three aspects to consider. The application of the relative non-prosecution system for drunk driving should be considered through a comprehensive consideration of the criteria for determining drunk driving, to achieve the treatment of minor drunk driving behaviors out of guilt. This can on the one hand save judicial resources, avoid the spillover effect of penalties, targeted management of drunk driving behavior, and at the same time can be connected with the plea system of leniency, the practical implementation of prudent arrest custody and prosecution of criminal justice concept, in the rule of law system to achieve drunk driving governance.Finally, combined with China‘s current judicial practice and judicial interpretation, from the drunk driving cases not to prosecute the system of judicial standards are not uniform, the application of insufficient, the conflict of the two non-prosecution system, the application of the lack of punishment for drunk driving behavior, supervision and relief mechanism is insufficient five aspects of reflective review. On this basis, the following suggestions are made to improve the non-prosecution system for drunk driving cases in China: first, to develop a unified judicial interpretation. Second, to regulate the application of the relative non-prosecution system, from the review of the necessity of prosecution, the establishment of applicable standards, the release of plea-bargained leniency effectiveness of three levels in a step-by-step manner. Third, expand the application of the system of conditional non-prosecution, drawing on the implicit presence in practice, in the future legislative amendments to clearly apply the system of conditional non-prosecution to drunk driving cases, to plead guilty to a fine, set clear conditions for application, and additional inspection system. Fourth, distinguish between the relative non-prosecution and conditional non-prosecution applicable circumstances. Fifth, the realization of the non-prosecution system and the interface of administrative punishment. Sixth, from the establishment of a hearing system, the implementation of the application mode, the smooth flow of relief in three ways to improve the supervision and relief mechanism of the non-prosecution system.