The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant was requested by a police officer to measure drinking on December 15, 2015 at around 03:10, around 03:20, and around 03:30 on December 15, 2015, and such demand is not explicitly rejected.

Although police officers, who have entered the defendant's residence to measure alcohol consumption to the defendant's family members, requested the withdrawal of the defendant and the defendant's family members, the police officers conducted a measurement of alcohol consumption to the defendant, so the police officers of this case are physically legal.

At the time of the measurement of drinking alcohol to the defendant, the defendant was driving;

Since there was no reasonable ground to determine the person, the defendant cannot be the subject of the crime of refusing to measure drinking.

Nevertheless, the court below found the guilty guilty guilty and erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below in light of the circumstances properly explained by the court below, i.e., the police officer who controlled drinking of this case at the time of measuring drinking of this case

G notifies I who is the spouse of the defendant that drinking measures for the defendant need to be taken when entering the residence of the defendant, and entered the defendant's residence with I's consent.

The testimony was made (for example, 65 pages of the trial record) and (2) The above G demanded that the Defendant take a drinking test at intervals of not less than three times from the time of the request for a drinking test on December 15, 2015 to the time of 03:30 of the same day, but the Defendant refused the measurement.

“The investigation report on the content was prepared(54 pages of evidence), the testimony was made to the same purpose in the original trial (69 pages of the trial record), and ③ the spouse I of the defendant who testified in favor of the defendant in the original trial, unlike the investigation agency, was also demanding the police officer to measure the volume of drinking 5-6 times at the time.

10 minutes required three times at intervals of 10 minutes.

“The testimony was made (38,42 pages of the trial record) and the police officer’s demand to leave the police officer is not less than one hour after the police officer entered the dwelling of the defendant.