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

On March 4, 2018, at around 06:16, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol by a police officer affiliated with the former police box of the U.S. police station, who was called by the CCTV control center after receiving a report on the driving of a bandon vehicle bandon the front of the Dong-dong, which was operated by the Defendant on March 4, 2018.

Although there is a reasonable reason to determine a person, he/she was requested from 06:20 to 06:50 on the same day to respond to the measurement of alcohol by the method of respiratory testing, but he/she did not comply with the measurement of alcohol without justifiable grounds despite the continuous request of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving at home, report on the circumstances of the driver at home, and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking;

1. A report on internal investigation (on-site conditions and statement by a reporter);

1. A copy of the ledger using the measuring instruments for drinking;

1. Application of each field photograph, CD-related statute;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the same Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate amount of punishment (including the fact that the defendant is against his/her will and that he/she has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine for the same kind of crime);

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (restatement of the aforementioned circumstances);

1. An order to attend a course under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;