도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
On September 17, 2016, at around 00:45, the Defendant: (a) while driving a rocketing taxi driver car at approximately 12 km from the front of the Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, to the road located in Seosan-si B, the Defendant was demanded from the slope E belonging to the Seosan Police Station D Zone D District, which was called after being reported 112 to have driven the said car under the influence of drinking, and was in compliance with the demand of the Defendant to put it into a drinking measuring instrument for approximately 34 minutes on four occasions in total, including around 01:30, 01:41, 01:52, 02:04 on the same day.
Nevertheless, the Defendant continued to avoid a drinking test and failed to comply with a police officer’s request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;
1. A copy of the usage register of drunks;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report of investigation (investigative records No. 32 pages);
1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act that selects the penalty;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the probation order, the order to attend a lecture, or the order to provide community service, requires strict punishment in that the defendant again commits the instant crime even though he/she had the record of being punished twice due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act.
However, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant is against mistake, that the defendant has no criminal records of probation or heavier punishment, and that there is no other criminal records of probation or heavier punishment, such as the defendant's age, character