The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles as follows, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

1) At the time of the instant case, the Defendant, by drinking alcohol and acting on behalf of the Defendant, arrived at the passenger car, as indicated in the facts charged in the instant facts charged, which is a residence (hereinafter “the instant passenger car”), and the Defendant did not drive the instant car directly.

The lower court determined that the police officers, who were dispatched to the site at the time of the instant case, may freely leave the scene where they refused to accompany the Defendant prior to voluntary accompanying, even if they were to refuse to accompany the Defendant or to accompany the Defendant at any time.

It did not inform the defendant, but rather restricted the movement of the defendant.

Such voluntary accompanying is illegal because it does not meet the lawful requirements, and the police officer's request for the measurement of drinking alcohol is also illegal. Thus, the defendant did not comply with such request.

Even if the crime of refusing to measure drinking alcohol is not established (hereinafter “B’s assertion”), as seen in the foregoing Section 1, the Defendant’s voluntary accompanying to the Defendant is unlawful, as seen in the foregoing Section 2, and the Defendant’s voluntary accompanying to the police station is broken off by means of expressing his or her suppression in the process of resisting such unlawful voluntary accompanying to the police station, which constitutes a legitimate act.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, 1) Violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of alcohol measurement) ① The lower court duly adopted and investigated the assertion.