2015No426 Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Drinking)

A person shall be appointed.

Prosecutor

Nowho-ho (prosecutions) and teare (Public Trial)

Attorney B

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2014Ma602 Decided April 24, 2015

June 23, 2016

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles)

The test of drinking of this case was conducted after the defendant was accompanied by the police box in response to his voluntary movement, and the report on detection of a drinking driver based on this was collected through legitimate procedures. Thus, the court below denied the admissibility of evidence and acquitted the defendant, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles of evidence law, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. According to the records of this case, although the defendant refused to accompany the police box to the police box by C, C merely notified the defendant that he could be arrested as an offender in the act of committing a crime, and the defendant did not inform the defendant that he could refuse to accompany the police box, even after accompanying the police box, and the defendant denied the driving of drinking even after the police officer's refusal to comply with the request for alcohol measurement by the police officer, and notified the police officer that he may refuse to comply with the request for alcohol measurement. However, if the above acknowledged facts are not carried out voluntarily, it is difficult to view that the defendant could have freely escaped from the police officer in the process of accompanying, and the time when C requested voluntary communication is one or more soldiers after driving the vehicle, and it is difficult to see that the defendant's request for voluntary communication satisfies the requirements for arrest of an offender in the act of committing a crime of violating Article 30-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act without complying with the lawful evidence of force and thus, it cannot be deemed that the defendant's voluntary compliance with the requirements for arrest of the police officer.

In this regard, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant on the ground that it is not sufficient to recognize the facts charged in this case with the remaining evidence alone is just and acceptable, and the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Masung-young

Judges Lee Jin-jin

Judges Yu Jae-young