The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is reasonable to view that driving of cusscoo vehicles as stated in the facts charged of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles to receive victim D vehicles, and that the Defendant and the J have justifiable grounds to refuse to comply with the police officer’s request for alcohol alcohol measurement, as long as the Defendant and the J revealed these facts immediately after the accident

In addition, the defendant has complied with the drinking test on four occasions at the request of the continued police officer.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which judged that the defendant driving the above Ecoos vehicle in the state of driving and damaged the above victim's vehicle and did not comply with the police officer's request for a sobage measurement without any justifiable reason is erroneous in the misunderstanding

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant has a justifiable reason to refuse the measurement of drinking, solely on the ground that the Defendant alleged that he was not a driver as long as he driven the above Ecoo vehicle, the Defendant would drive the Ecoo vehicle as stated in the facts charged in the case.

① As to the circumstances of the instant accident, F, who appeared at the scene of the Defendant’s driving, stated to the effect that “A public parking lot was sent to a substitute driving call, and the Defendant would take steps and act as an agent for the Defendant who was driving in the driver’s seat after taking the damaged vehicle while driving, and the Defendant, who became in harmony assaulted F.”

The statements of this F. F.