The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, has stopped a vehicle driving by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and has not driven a vehicle after drinking the vehicle.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the defendant refused a legitimate drinking test by a police officer even though there was no reasonable ground to recognize that the defendant was driving the vehicle in this case while under the influence of alcohol.

B. According to the National Police Agency's traffic control guidelines, a driver who fails to comply with a drinking test shall be notified at least three times at intervals of 10 minutes of disadvantage due to the refusal to take a drinking test, and a police officer at the time of the instant case requested a drinking test twice (15:25 years and 15:35 days) on the ground that the Defendant had not driven a drinking test and refused the measurement, and the police officer forced the Defendant to take a drinking test at the district and forced the Defendant to take a drinking test again at the district level (15:57 times). The police officer's duty as above was erroneous in the procedure of violating the above guidance to take a drinking test at intervals of 10 minutes, and ② at the time of receiving the two-time drinking test request, the police officer assaulted the Defendant and forced him to take a drinking test at intervals of 10 minutes, thereby violating due process of law by failing to meet the principle of due process of the Road Traffic Act.

Even if the defendant has driven at the time of the instant case, it is used as the passage of the apartment parking lot and parking lot.