The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. A. The police officer sent to the site of this case by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (as to refusal of measurement), was unable to wear a lock against the defendant without going through lawful procedures only on the basis of the reporter’s statement.

Furthermore, even though the police officer did not commit any act such as provoking the defendant's riot, the police officer continued to take a guard and forced the person to take a drinking test even after the defendant gets involved on the earth.

The Defendant’s refusal to take a drinking level as the next source of protesting against the above illegal investigation is justified.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles may be made either on or immediately after the commission of the relevant crime without a warrant (Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Act). In order to arrest a flagrant offender, there should be concerns over the necessity of arrest, i.e., the necessity of escape or destruction of evidence in addition to the punishment of the act, the current and time contact of the crime, the apparentness of the crime and the crime. Whether the requirements for the arrest of the flagrant offender are satisfied should be determined based on the circumstances at the time of arrest. There is room for considerable discretion. Therefore, in light of the situation at the time of arrest, unless the determination of the investigative body on the requirements is deemed unreasonable in light of the empirical rule, the arrest of the investigative body is not deemed unlawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do13726, Feb. 18, 2016). In order to arrest a flagrant offender or arrest a flagrant offender, a prosecutor or judicial police officer means the reason for the arrest of the suspect and the opportunity to defend the suspect under Article 20-5 of the Criminal Act.