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

On February 20, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 02:20 on February 20, 2013, from the Jeju Jeju Jeju-do, to the front road of 1621-12, the 1621-12, the Gosi-dong, Gosi-si, the Defendant driven approximately 2 km section from drinking to the B, and voluntarily driven as the C district at the Sinung-si, and (b) around 02:54 on the same day, the Defendant was requested to comply with a drinking test by inserting approximately 30 minutes of alcohol in a manner of putting about 30 minutes of the alcohol measuring instrument into the face, and he did not comply with it.

As a result, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for a alcohol test even though there is a considerable reason to recognize that he driven a motor vehicle while drunk.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. The circumstantial report on the driver, and the report on the status of the driver's license;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (Evidence records 11, 55 pages);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act (the occupation of refusing to measure sound and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. It shall be considered that the defendant is against the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the fact that the defendant is punished twice for the same criminal record. It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.