The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the police officer's voluntary behavior against the defendant constitutes an illegal arrest, and thus, the court below denied admissibility of the defendant's report on detection of the driver and the report on the circumstantial statement of the driver from the driver from the defendant collected under illegal arrest, and found the defendant not guilty on the grounds that there is no other evidence to prove the facts charged, but it is legitimate that voluntary behavior against the defendant was conducted by the defendant's voluntary will, and it cannot be viewed as an unfair psychological pressure against the defendant on the ground that the police officer notified the defendant that he could be arrested in the act of crime or requested additional human resources assistance when the police officer dispatched to the scene at the time refused voluntary behavior. Thus, the above report on detection of the driver from the driver from the driver from the State and the report on the circumstantial statement of the driver from the driver from the State can be taken as evidence, and the court below rejected and acquitted the defendant on the charges of this case even if considering each reliable statement of witness E and the police officer D dispatched to

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was around 02:10 on February 26, 2013, the Defendant driven a CS5-car at approximately 50 meters prior to the Changwon-si Busan-dong 79-9 restaurant at Changwon-si, Changwon-si, under the influence of alcohol content of 0.081% of the blood alcohol content around 02:10 on February 26, 2013.

B. The judgment of the court below 1) Article 199(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act explicitly states the principle of voluntary investigation. However, the investigator’s accompanying the suspect to the investigative agency, etc. in the form of consent in the course of investigation does not have any means to restrain the suspect’s physical freedom even though it is restricted, and it does not have any means to restrain it from being practically similar to the arrest. Thus, the investigative agency’s discretion as well as its institutional discretion should be guaranteed.