The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was driving a d cafeteria, and the Defendant did not drink any clerical error in the D cafeteria, and drank only after the d cafeteria arrives in the D cafeteria.

The defendant is in a drunken state.

Since it is not a person who has a reasonable ground to determine the person, even if the police officer did not comply with the request for a measurement of drinking, the crime of non-performance of drinking measurement is not established.

B. The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant driven a breab while under the influence of alcohol.

Since there is a reasonable reason to determine the person, the defendant's non-compliance with the police officer's measurement of drinking alcohol constitutes a crime of refusing to comply with the measurement of drinking alcohol.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower court in comparison with the evidence examined, the lower court’s finding and determination of the above facts are justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the judgment

B. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime; and (b) there is no special circumstance or circumstance to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment; and (c) the sentencing of the lower court is not unfair.

3. The Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.