When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On September 24, 2014, at around 23:53, the Defendant was demanded to comply with the drinking test by inserting the drinking measuring instrument three times for about 30 minutes, while driving a knife of the long-term village of Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si in front of an apartment, while driving a knife vehicle of the Cknife on the front of the apartment, there is considerable reason to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking a drinking reduction reaction from D, belonging to the traffic control division of the Kimpo-si Police Station, while driving the knife on the front of the apartment.

그럼에도 불구하고 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정 요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. The circumstantial report on a drinking driver, the circumstantial report on a drinking driver, the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, the ledger of using a drinking measuring instrument, the internal investigation report (in relation to the situation at the time of crackdown on the suspect), the investigation report (in the field), and the video CD in the field;

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant did not take a measurement even when the Defendant put the Defendant in a normal drinking measuring instrument, but did not comply with the police officer’s request for a drinking test. However, the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of each of the above evidence, namely, the following circumstances acknowledged by the police officer, which were under the control of drinking, led to a decrease in the Defendant’s signal to put the Defendant in a drinking-free season, and the police officer controlling the suspicion of drinking-free driving caused the Defendant to put the Defendant into drinking-free, but did not have a proper wind over several times, and it appears that the drinking measuring instrument used at the time of the instant case was in a normal working condition. In full view of the following circumstances, the Defendant was unable to put the wind into the drinking-free measuring instrument at the time of the instant case.