도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) was under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant was unable to recognize the request for measurement of the first and second drinking alcohol, and the Defendant was also unable to recognize the fact of the request for measurement of the third drinking alcohol because of his or her birth and currency.
In addition, the police officer in charge did not properly implement the procedure of the request for the measurement of drinking, such as not requiring the defendant to make a clear measurement of drinking.
Therefore, at the time, the defendant had the intention to refuse to take a drinking test or the defendant's intention to refuse to take a drinking test clearly and objectively.
shall not be deemed to exist.
2. 판 단 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하면, 1차 측정요구 당시 음주 운전 신고를 받고 출동한 경찰관들은 편도 8 차선 중 3 차로에 시동과 전조등을 켠 채로 정차된 차량 안에서 잠을 자고 있던 피고인에게 지구대로 동행하여 음주 측정할 것을 요구하였으나 피고인이 이를 거부하여 현장에서 음주 측정을 요구하였으나, 피고인이 “ 교통의 경을 나와 이런 것에 대해 잘 안다” 고 하면서 음주 측정에 응하지 않은 사실, 이후 피고인이 임의 동행을 하겠다고
to avoid voluntary accompanying while moving to the patrol vehicle.
On the other hand, while getting off at the patrol car, the defendant demanded the second and third measurement, and the defendant, "the same police officer is the same that he is the same police officer," and "the same is different only once" and "the police officer does not comply with the measurement of drinking for about 20 minutes so that he does not respond to the measurement of drinking for about 20 minutes," and the police officer notified the defendant that he is able to measure the collection of blood, but the police officer notified the defendant that he would be able to measure the collection of blood, but the defendant's speech and attitude at the time of the request for the measurement of drinking, the police officer's request for the measurement of drinking for the above reasons.