beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Around 05:00 on August 5, 2012, the Defendant: (a) while driving a D Atop car in front of the building south-gu C in the port where his residence was located; (b) caused an accident involving the use of a car by E, a neighboring resident, who was parked in the vicinity of the building; and (c) E directly observed the said accident at the home of his house in the same Dong and reported the accident to the police around 05:22 on the same day.
On the same day, the police officer H and police officer assigned to the G police box of the Posnnam Police Station, who received the report as above, called the Defendant’s residence at around 05:27 on the same day. At the time, the Defendant was snicked, sniffed in the entrance, and sniffed in an inaccurate state, and sniffed the Defendant’s walked in an inaccurate state. The Defendant voluntarily carried out the vehicle with the G police box located in the same GuJ. On the same day, the assistant K of the G police box, who was assigned to the G police box, demanded the Defendant to take a alcohol test three times in total between 06:34 and 06:55 on the same day, but the Defendant refused to take a alcohol test by means
As a result, although there is a considerable reason to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant did not comply with the measurement without justifiable reason.
2. The judgment of the court below
A. At the lower court, the Defendant recognized the fact that he caused an accident involving a car owned by E while driving as stated in the facts charged of this case, but argued that he was only dysing alcohol by failing to drink at the time of driving and returning to the house.
B. The court below held that the defendant dices alcohol before driving.
There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant accident, and considering the circumstances as stated in its reasoning that were duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, it cannot be ruled out that the Defendant was not under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant accident, such as the Defendant’s assertion, but under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant accident.