except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. 도로교통법위반(무면허운전) 피고인은 2013. 9. 22. 18:10경 보령시 신흑동에 있는 대천해수욕장에서부터 같은 동에 있는 됫박산사거리 앞에 이르기까지 약 1km 구간에서 자동차 운전면허를 받지 아니하고 B 쏘나타 승용차를 운전하였다.

2. 도로교통법위반(음주측정거부) 피고인은 2013. 9. 22. 18:10경 보령시 신흑동에 있는 됫박산사거리 앞에서 제1항 기재 쏘나타 차량을 운전하다가 교통사고를 내어 보령 경찰서 C지구대 소속 순경 D으로부터 피고인에게서 술 냄새가 나고 얼굴에 홍조를 띄는 등 술에 취한 상태에서 운전하였다고 인정할만한 상당한 이유가 있어 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 방법으로 음주측정에 응할 것을 요구받았으나 입김을 불어넣기를 거부하여 정당한 사유 없이 음주측정에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Notification of the results of the regulation of drivers;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Application of the statutes on the register of driver's licenses;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting a crime and driving without obtaining a license or a sentence: Subparagraph 1 of Article 152 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act to refuse to take a measurement of drinking alcohol: Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes among concurrent crimes as provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the aggravation of concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment) ;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as "the first sentence for sentencing") has many records of being punished for driving under the influence of alcohol, and the latter has repeatedly driven under the influence of alcohol despite the prior action of the fine, and is just to be relieved of the punishment.