2. Determination

A. On April 3, 2014, the summary of the facts charged was found by the Defendant at the time of the police box of the Namyang-gu Police Station, at around 02:00, at that time, in a vehicle parked on the road of the two-lane in South-Eup, Nam-gu, Namyang-gu, and there was considerable reason to suspect that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling and smelling red on the face, and thus, the Defendant demanded the Defendant to take a drinking test three times more than twenty-five minutes in a manner that the slopeD affiliated with the above C police box did not breath a drinking measuring instrument, but refused to take a drinking test without justifiable grounds.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) based on the following: (b) at the time of a police officer’s dispatch of a vehicle to the site where the Defendant’s vehicle was parked after receiving a report from the police officer, it turned on headlights and tail lights at the time of the Defendant’s moving on a stop, and was stopped in the direction of driving on the second line among the third line roads; and (b) when a police officer opened a vehicle door, the Defendant was driving the safety bell at the driver’s seat of the vehicle; (c) but the Defendant was able to take the safety bell at the driver’s seat of the vehicle; (d) however, the Defendant was able to have driven the vehicle under the influence of alcohol; and (e) the police officer’s demand for the measurement of alcohol by the police officer was unlawful.

The Defendant found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the ground that it cannot be deemed that there was a justifiable reason to refuse the demand for alcohol testing.

(c) police officers in charge of traffic safety and decision-making;