The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: the Defendant was unable to breath a drinking measuring instrument due to a pulmonary disease, and the Defendant did not collect blood from the police officer despite the Defendant’s consent to blood collection; thus, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case even though the Defendant did not refuse to measure drinking. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. On June 18, 2017, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking alcohol reduction reaction, smelling alcohol, and smelling on the face, while driving a motor vehicle with Dives drive on the front of C in Busan-gu, Busan-gu, Busan-do, Busan-gu, Police Station E AssistantF belonging to the Busan, which was under the control of drinking, while driving a motor vehicle.

Due to reasonable grounds, there was a demand for responding to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately 40 minutes into a drinking measuring instrument.

그러나 피고인은 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정 요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the following grounds.

‘ 이 법정에서 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하면, 한눈에 보기에도 술에 상당히 취한 것으로 보이는 피고인이 겉으로는 호흡 측정기에 의한 음주 측정에 응하는 것처럼 하면서 실제로는 호흡 측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하여 측정이 되지 않게 하다가 결국에는 호흡 측정 또는 혈액 채취에 의한 음주 측정을 모두 거부함으로써 적법한 경찰공무원의 음주 측정 요구에 응하지 아니한 사실을 넉넉히 인정할 수 있다.

“”

C. Determination of the party deliberation 1) “A police officer’s measurement” as referred to in Article 148-2(1)2 of the Liby Road Traffic Act.