The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in light of the details of 112 reports at the time of the instant case, the situation of dispatch to the site, etc., it is difficult to view that the judgment of the Defendant to be a criminal immediately after the completion of the criminal act of drinking alcohol is manifestly unreasonable.

Therefore, since the legality of arrest of a flagrant offender is fully recognized, this case's drinking test is also legitimate.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. The Defendant, on September 7, 2016, driven the vehicles of QM3 under the influence of alcohol on the front of the DNA road located in Pyeongtaek-si C around September 22, 2016.

The defendant, upon receiving a report that "the person driving a drinking alcohol from the vehicle, is driving a motor vehicle from the driver G of the F District of the Pyeongtaek-gu Police Station", the defendant was driving the motor vehicle.

In order to respond to the measurement of drinking alcohol by inserting the whole in a drinking measuring instrument over about 30 minutes due to reasonable grounds, but did not comply with it without justifiable grounds.

3. The lower court’s judgment held that, in a case where a request for a measurement of drinking alcohol was made under an illegal arrest, it is inappropriate to assess whether the request for a measurement of drinking alcohol was made in succession for the purpose of evidence collection on a criminal act of driving alcohol, and thus, it is inappropriate to evaluate the legal nature of the request individually. Thus, the series of processes should be considered as a whole, and the driver has a duty to comply with a police officer’s request for a measurement of drinking alcohol.

Therefore, it is unfair to enforce it, and therefore, it was refused to do so.

On November 9, 2006, it cannot be punished for violation of the Road Traffic Act concerning refusal to measure drinking (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8404 delivered on November 9, 2006).