The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant alleged a misunderstanding of facts refused to measure drinking under the illegal arrest, the lower court convicted him of the charges of this case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence that the court below sentenced to the defendant (the penalty amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of fact 1) Article 199(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act specifies the principle of voluntary investigation.

In the form of an investigator's accompanying a suspect to an investigative agency, etc. in the form of obtaining consent in the course of an investigation, since there is no way to suppress the suspect's physical freedom because it is restricted and substantially similar to the arrest, it is not possible to guarantee voluntaryness as well as institutionally through it, and it is highly likely that the Constitution and Criminal Litigation Act do not provide various rights guarantee devices granted to a suspect under arrest and detention on the ground that it is prior to the regular arrest and detention stage.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the legality of accompanying is recognized only in cases where an investigator knew that he/she could refuse accompanying the suspect prior to accompanying, or the suspect accompanied could freely leave the accompanying place at any time, and where it is clearly proven by objective circumstances that the accompanying was carried out by the suspect’s voluntary will (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do8890, Sept. 13, 2012). 2) The following circumstances, namely, ① Police Officer J and I may refuse accompanying the defendant at any time at the time at the time when he/she accompanys the Defendant to the H district of the Incheon Central Police Station.