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

On December 12, 2015, around 23:50 on December 23:2, 2015, the Defendant was under the control of drinking from D, while driving a CK5 car on the road following the 3rd village of the Nam-gu Incheon Namdong-dong, Seo-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City.

At the time, the defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol by the defendant, such as smelling, being red on the face of the defendant.

인 정할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어 위 단속 경찰관으로부터 약 40분에 걸쳐 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 방법으로 음주 측정에 응할 것을 요구 받았음에도 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court (the fifth public trial date);

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Reporting on detection of suspects in violation of traffic laws (driving of alcohol) on roads, and reporting on the situation of driving under the driving of alcohol;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. The application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing drinking refusal, photograph, U.S. S.B;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act of the order of provisional payment has a record of a single-time crime due to drinking driving, and it may be at issue as to whether the driving of a motor vehicle constitutes drinking under the Road Traffic Act, even if the driver had driven the motor vehicle, and it is not good that the crime was committed in the instant crime of refusing to take a lawful drinking test by the traffic policemen several times, but the defendant does not constitute an act of refusing to take a drinking test subject to criminal punishment only when he requests the traffic policemen

The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by misunderstanding the internal uses of the laws and regulations related to drinking alcohol, and the Defendant initially committed the instant crime.