The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles require blood collection from the beginning, and this Chapter is video recording on CCTV. Even if the defendant requested blood collection only at the middle stage of the police's request for pulmonary measurement more than three times after failing to comply with the initial pulmonary measurement, even though the police continued to demand pulmonary measurement in accordance with the traffic control guidelines, it cannot be deemed a legitimate procedure, and thus, it is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, even though the defendant did not constitute a crime of non-compliance with pulmonary measurement in accordance with the Road Traffic Act.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The reasoning of the lower judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles and ① Article 38(6) of the Traffic Control Guidelines provides that “When a person under consideration requests to collect blood or objects to the result of measurement, the person under consideration shall request the National Science Investigation and Research Institute to appraise blood collected in accordance with attached Table 17 at the medical institution, such as the nearest hospital, etc., which obtained the consent of the person under consideration, immediately after preparing a separate report on detection of a driver.” However, in light of the purport of Article 44(2) and (3) of the Road Traffic Act, which is the upper law, the method of measurement by the breath and apply only to the case where the person under consideration requests to collect blood, and ② the Defendant requested to collect blood from the police from the beginning at the time of the police statement.” However, according to the CCTV verification result of the lower court, the Defendant already requested the Defendant to sell blood collected at the port only when it was about 22:08.