[1] The elements for the establishment of a crime of non-compliance with a drinking test and the standard for determining whether there are reasonable grounds to recognize a state of drinking

[2] The case holding that there are reasonable grounds to acknowledge that the defendant was in a drunken state in light of objective circumstances, such as external appearance, attitude, and tending of the defendant

[1] Articles 41(2) and 107-2 subparag. 2 of the Road Traffic Act / [2] Articles 41(2) and 107-2 subparag. 2 of the Road Traffic Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 99Do2899 delivered on December 28, 1999 (Gong2000Sang, 427) Supreme Court Decision 2000Do6026 delivered on August 24, 2001 (Gong2001Ha, 2141) Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5987 Delivered on June 14, 2002 (Gong2002Ha, 1737) Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6632 Delivered on January 24, 2003 (Gong2003Sang, 761)

Defendant

Defendant

Daejeon District Court Decision 2004No452 Delivered on July 23, 2004

The appeal is dismissed.

In order to establish a crime of non-compliance with a drinking test, a driver at the time of the request for a drinking test does not necessarily have to be in a state above 0.05% of blood alcohol level, but there must be reasonable grounds to recognize that the driver at the time of the request for a drinking test is in a state above 0.05% of blood alcohol level. Furthermore, whether there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the driver is under the influence of alcohol should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances, such as his appearance, attitude, and driving behavior, at the time of the request for a drinking test (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6632, Jan. 24,

Examining the evidence of the court below and the court of first instance maintained by the court below in light of the records, the defendant acknowledged that he has her her her her her own her own her own her drinking at the time, and rejected the defendant's request even though he/she did not contain any concealment to the extent necessary for the operation of the drinking measuring apparatus despite the police's request by several times of red and smelling, and requested the police to take a drinking test by means of blood gathering at nearby hospitals, and the police refused the defendant's request. At the time, the police asserted that her refusal was the defendant's request for blood gathering by means of blood gathering at nearby hospitals. At the time of the defendant's her heart disease, the defendant did not have any choice to put her her her her her her her breath, or there was any her her her own her own breath or any other her herbreath at the time of knowing the above facts. In full view of objective circumstances such as the defendant's appearance, attitude, and her her herbrea.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-sik (Presiding Justice)