The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not accept the result of the re-measurement and the assessment of blood collection as to blood alcohol concentration, and thus, did not receive a notification from the control police officer that he/she may refuse the re-measurement and the assessment of blood collection.

Even if the blood collection appraisal procedure was notified, the opportunity for blood collection appraisal is not substantially guaranteed.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as inquiry about the result of crackdown on drinking driving, alone, does not prove the fact of drinking driving.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the statements by enforcement officers who acknowledged credibility for the following reasons and the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, the police officers, after the Defendant’s pulmonary measurement, refused to demand re-measurement, but sufficiently notified the Defendant that there was the procedure for assessing blood collection. Nevertheless, the Defendant did not make an appraisal of blood collection.

the facts are recognized.

Therefore, the Defendant’s facts charged can be fully acknowledged even with the result of the measurement by the pulmonary measuring instrument of this case.

(1) A witness E or F, who is a controlling police officer, is relatively consistent and specific from an investigative agency to the court of the original trial, to the extent that the defendant's request for re-examination is not allowed

The defendant notified the defendant of the blood collection appraisal procedure, but the defendant did not appraise blood collection.

was stated to the effect that “....”

② Control police officers controlled the Defendant and 20 minutes after drinking, followed the relevant procedures such as measuring after the group of vehicles to be faced with water, etc., and kept the Defendant at home after the crackdown.

③ Although there are two police officers, the fact that the Defendant continued to request the appraisal of blood collection, the police officers’ refusal to request the appraisal of blood collection cannot be easily acceptable in light of the empirical rule.

B. As seen earlier, the Defendant was notified of the blood collection appraisal procedure from the enforcement officers.