도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The sentencing of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, 40 hours of probation, 120 hours of community service work) is too uneasible to the gist of reasons for appeal.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant, even though he had a record of being punished several times for the same crime, is driving again.
Since police officers did not comply with the request for a drinking test after detection, the responsibility for the crime is heavy.
B. Meanwhile, there are extenuating circumstances, such as the Defendant’s failure to impose a sentence on the Defendant, and the Defendant’s attempt to refrain from driving under the influence of alcohol again as he repented of the error in the course of serving in depth.
In addition, considering all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, living environment, family relationship, details and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the lower court is adequate.
3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.