The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant did not request the police officer to take a blood test by means of a blood test at the site of drinking control, and the defendant refused to take a drinking test to avoid punishment for driving under drinking, but the police officer's refusal to take a blood test by means of blood test and requested only a breath measurement method and found the defendant not guilty of the defendant's refusal to take a breath test on the premise that the method of

2. In full view of the circumstances properly explained by the lower court, in particular, the content of the police officer’s notification to the Defendant from the video file of the refusal to measure, the police officer F’s legal testimony at the time of the control, the Defendant’s consistent statement, etc., it is difficult to avoid the possibility that the control police officer refused the Defendant’s blood measurement request by means of a breath measurement method and continued to require the breath measurement by means of a breath measurement, despite the Defendant’s request for a breath measurement by means of a blood measurement method.

In light of these circumstances, the lower court’s determination that acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed as having proven without any reasonable doubt cannot be deemed as having been justifiable and erroneous.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.