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

The defendant is a driver of a c wheels vehicle.

On August 3, 2016, the Defendant driven under the influence of alcohol, such as passing over about 10 meters from the route of the F Village of the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun

On August 3, 2016, 17:35 to 18:15 on August 3, 2016, after receiving a request for repulmonary testing on six occasions, it did not comply with the alcohol testing without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Investigation reports (on-site situations, refusal to measure drinking, etc.);

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on driving drinking, the 112 report processing table, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the scene of accident;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Claims by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the costs of lawsuit;

1. The Defendant alleged that he had not driven under the influence of alcohol because he was towed by the instant two-wheeled vehicle and was under a sudden slope, and that he did not comply with the drinking test on the ground that he did not have a drinking test because he was under the influence of alcohol due to the inconvenience of drinking, such as the leaving the dys of the dysnish

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments presented by the above evidence, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol.

The defendant's assertion that the defendant did not comply with the request of the police officer for the measurement of drinking without good cause is acceptable, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to determine the person.

(1) Police Officers G who called to the scene of this case shall do so.