All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (3 million won) is excessively unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (refluence of alcohol measurement) on the ground that the voluntary accompanying constituted an illegal arrest as a de facto coercion, even though the Defendant voluntarily accompanied the voluntary accompanying, and that the demand for alcohol measurement was illegal, and thus, it was unlawful by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court is unreasonable as it is too unfortunate.

2. Determination of the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine

A. Relevant legal principles 1) Article 199(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act specifies the principle of voluntary investigation.

In the form of an investigator's accompanying a suspect to an investigative agency, etc. in the form of obtaining consent in the course of an investigation, since there is no way to suppress the suspect's physical freedom because it is restricted and substantially similar to the arrest, it is not possible to guarantee voluntaryness as well as institutionally through it, and it is highly likely that the Constitution and Criminal Litigation Act do not provide various rights guarantee devices granted to a suspect under arrest and detention on the ground that it is prior to the regular arrest and detention stage.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the legality of accompanying is recognized only in cases where it is clearly proven by objective circumstances that an investigator was carried out by the suspect’s voluntary will, such as where the investigator knew that he/she could refuse accompanying the suspect prior to accompanying, or where the suspect was allowed to leave the accompanying place at any time, etc., at any time, and where the suspect was carried out by the investigative agency, etc. by the voluntary will of the suspect (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do6810, Jul. 6, 2006; 2012Do890, Sept. 13, 2012).