The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is as follows: (a) the Defendant was driving a car under the influence of alcohol (hereinafter “car in this case”) at a driver’s seat on the facts charged under the influence of alcohol; and (b) there is no dispute over the fact that the said car moved about about about 50 cm, and the issue of this case is whether the Defendant moved the instant car with the intention of driving.

In view of the video taken by the reporter at the time, it is confirmed that the vehicle of this case naturally moved to the future from the flat where there is no slope, and it is confirmed that the group of persons who are different from the vehicle of this case will turn on and stop it. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion that the vehicle of this case was cut down at a low level from the clura to the clura is difficult to believe.

In addition, in light of the fact that the instant vehicle is a multiple-speed vehicle, and if a flag is set at one set, such as the Defendant’s assertion, it is clear that at the time the Defendant took measures, such as cutting off bracks with the intention of driving and replacing bracks with the intention of driving, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant moved the instant vehicle with the intention of driving.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the defendant's act does not constitute driving on the part of the defendant.

Based on the judgment of the court, the charged facts of this case were acquitted.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The crime of refusing to comply with the measurement of drinking under Article 148-2 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act is under the influence of alcohol.

A person with reasonable grounds for appointment shall be established when he/she fails to comply with the measurement by a police officer under Article 44 (2) of the same Act.

On the other hand, Article 44 (2) of the same Act recognizes a police officer as necessary to ensure traffic safety and prevent danger, or is under the influence of alcohol in violation of the provisions of paragraph (1).