The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are illegal, and if a request for a drinking test was made under an illegal voluntary behavior (Arrest), it shall not be deemed that there was an illegal drinking test request.

As such, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant cannot be punished as a crime of refusing to measure drinking alcohol.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The crime of refusing to measure a alcohol under Article 148-2 subparagraph 2 of the Road Traffic Act is established when a person who has considerable reasons to be recognized as being under the influence of alcohol fails to comply with a police officer's measurement under Article 44 (2) of the same Act. The measurement of alcohol conducted solely on the ground that there are considerable reasons to recognize that a person under the influence of alcohol had been under the influence of alcohol even though traffic safety and prevention of danger does not need to be conducted, has meaning as an investigation procedure to collect evidence of the crime already conducted. Thus, in order to make the driver under the influence of alcohol, the act of compelling alcohol without disregarding such procedure constitutes an illegal arrest, and the act of demanding a alcohol measurement constitutes an illegal arrest. The illegal arrest for the alcohol measurement and the request for a alcohol measurement are made consecutively in order to collect evidence of the crime of driving under the influence of alcohol, and the evaluation of its legitimacy is not appropriate individually, and the overall process of the alcohol measurement is deemed to have been unlawful.