The judgment below

The acquittal portion shall be reversed.

Of the facts charged in this case, the refusal of drinking alcohol measurement is caused.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant (guilty part of the judgment of the court below)'s punishment (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles (not guilty part of the judgment below) Defendant driving a motor vehicle in a drinking condition.

On February 12, 2017, when the judicial police officer requested the defendant to take a drinking test on the first floor of the apartment building in which the defendant resides, the defendant refused to take such test, and the defendant immediately refused to take such test, and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of drinking test) is established.

If the defendant refuses to take a measurement of discretionary drinking, the above crime is established immediately and the compulsory investigation procedure is not required, but the court below failed to take measures for legitimate compulsory investigation.

In light of this, there is an error of finding the not guilty of this part of the charges.

2) Improper sentencing (the guilty part of the judgment of the court below) is unfair because the above sentence of the court below is too uneasible.

2. Before the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor tried to examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal, and the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment to the facts charged after changing the attached Form No. 2 of the facts charged prior to the amendment of the attached Form No. 2 of the 2017 Highest 208, and the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained as the subject of the judgment was changed by permitting it.

However, even if there are such reasons for ex officio reversal, the Prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding the above facts or misapprehension of the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of the facts charged after the modification.

3. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle or mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged is as stated in the facts charged after the amendment.

B. (1) The crime of refusing to comply with the measurement of drinking under Article 148-2 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act is under the influence of alcohol.

Article 44 of the same Act.