The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding the assertion that it is not admissible as a result of drinking by illegal voluntary accompanying, the court below held that the defendant's voluntary accompanying was admissible as a result of the police officer's request for accompanying the police officer to the police station to measure drinking, and the defendant was on the patrol vehicle by his voluntary will, and demanded the police officer to leave the police station while moving to the police station, but immediately after that request the police officer to hear the explanation of the investigation process and promptly move to the police station, so the defendant's voluntary accompanying was made by the defendant's voluntary will, and the result

The decision was determined.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on the legality of voluntary accompanying and the rules on the exclusion of illegally collected evidence, as alleged in the Defendant’s grounds of appeal.

2. With respect to the witness F’s testimony that the hearsay statement has no admissibility, the lower court, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the police officer F sent to the instant site and asked the Defendant questions; (b) the Defendant’s actions at the time of responding to F’s questioning; (c) the process of voluntary accompanying; and (d) the situation at the time of interrogation of the witness F’s testimony, the part of the witness F’s testimony containing the Defendant’s statement is admissible as it is proved

In full view of the testimony of the witness F and the testimony of the witness E, the defendant was driving under drinking as stated in the facts charged.

The decision was determined.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on admissibility of evidence when the statement at the trial date of a person other than the Defendant, as alleged in the grounds of appeal by the Defendant, was made with the content of the statement of the Defendant or another person

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