A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by misapprehending the legal doctrine, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, although there were justifiable grounds for refusing to comply with the pulmonary measurement while requiring a measurement by blood collection method.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (7 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principle on the assertion of mistake of fact or misapprehension of the legal principle (1) The measurement by other means such as blood collection under Article 44(3) of the Road Traffic Act can be conducted when the result of the measurement by the respiratory tester is dissatisfied with the result of the measurement by the respiratory tester. Thus, if the measurement by the method of blood collection is requested and the measurement by the respiratory tester is not complied with, there

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant left the site without taking necessary measures to damage two damaged vehicles in Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul with his driving vehicle at the time of the instant case. The defendant stopped the defendant's driving vehicle at the same time in the same Gu I and was diving at the driver's seat, and the police officers dispatched at the time of the instant case did not comply with the request for a breath measurement by steam on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of breath on the part of the defendant.