The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles) but did not notify the defendant that the police officer in charge could refuse to accompany prior to voluntary accompanying, or did not prepare a written consent of voluntary accompanying.

In light of the circumstances before and after voluntary accompanying, the circumstances leading up to the defendant's voluntary accompanying, the process of voluntary accompanying, the defendant's attitude, etc., the defendant's voluntary accompanying is legitimate. Thus, the admissibility of evidence, such as reporting on the situation of driving in the instant case, and inquiry about the result of regulating drinking driving, can be recognized.

Even if the defendant's voluntary accompanying to the defendant is illegal, according to the defendant's legal statement, etc., it can be recognized that the defendant was driving at least 0.05% alcohol concentration in blood.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. The court below clearly proved that voluntary accompanying procedures against the defendant were lawfully conducted as stated in detail on the grounds of the judgment of innocence by objective circumstances.

As long as it cannot be seen, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there is no evidence to prove the facts charged of this case (in the surrounding part) that the Defendant driven under the influence of alcohol content 0.131% in blood.

B. In this regard, in light of the background leading up to the police officer's dispatch to the site after receiving a report, the status of the defendant, and the process leading up to the police officer's movement to the nearby area, etc., the prosecutor's series of measures taken by the police officers are legitimate as part of protective measures under Article 4 (1) of the Act on the Execution of Police Officers' Duties, and thus, the admissibility of evidence such as the result of drinking alcohol measurement against the defendant during the process can be recognized.